A great big "Thank You" to all who voiced their opinions to the Broward County Commission about the Port Everglades expansion. The Commission voted to sever the proposed turning notch from the Master Plan, so it looks as if the mangrove swamp and the ecosystem that it supports are safe for a while.
It wasn't easy, but thanks to a prior court order that granted an easement to the State of Florida trading the last expansion for the sanctity of the remaining mangroves, the mangroves are supposedly protected in perpetuity. The Commission and the Port management team, however, were trying to negotiate with the state to have the order rescinded based on the premise that the Port would mitigate the damages by developing West Lake Park as a wildlife area. It is already a wildlife area in that it is undeveloped property, and a little bit of landscaping won't make that much difference.
The bulk of the property in question is privately held, and to date, the County Commission has only purchased 11/16 acres. I suppose that if they invoke emminent domain, they will have to offer fair market value, but as it now stands, they are practically stealing what they can.
There was also an attempt to satisfy mitigation through the acquisition of Deerfield Island, but it too, is already a wildlife park, and is some thirty miles from the construction area.
The project now is to save the 15 or more acres of our coral reef that will be destroyed through the widening and deepening of the Port entry channel. Deepening an existing channel is bad enough, in that the existing sea life will be moderated, but the only reason to widen the channel is to have room to allow 2 of the new larger class ships to pass within the channel. Proper scheduling of arrivals and departures will preclude this possibility, and the destruction of the reef is totally unnecessary.
So again, my thanks to each and every one of you for your efforts, but our work is not over until we can put a stop to wanton destruction of the environment. Lets not give up.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
A Great Day for the Manatees
I am including an email I received from the Save The Manatee Club that proves that we can present a voice that will be heard if we come together and let people know what we desire.
With Your Help, We Did It!
Hi Grant, Incredible news!! We just learned today that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) deferred the manatee's status change from Endangered to Threatened. They also directed their staff to undertake a review of the flawed state classification system for ALL imperiled species. These are two major victories for manatees that we've achieved with your help!
Citing the need for a better method to estimate the manatee population and the record 417 manatee deaths in 2006, Governor Charlie Crist asked the FWC to reject the status change and the Commissioners complied. ''We need to protect these gentle creatures,'' said Governor Crist in a recent interview with the The Miami Herald.
The governor's stand was courageous and your outpouring of support gave him the encouragement he needed. In fact, the FWC reported that the governor's office received over 28,000 messages on manatees and the majority of them were in favor of keeping manatees designated as Endangered. With your help, we have accomplished a huge triumph for manatees!
With Your Help, We Did It!
Hi Grant, Incredible news!! We just learned today that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) deferred the manatee's status change from Endangered to Threatened. They also directed their staff to undertake a review of the flawed state classification system for ALL imperiled species. These are two major victories for manatees that we've achieved with your help!
Citing the need for a better method to estimate the manatee population and the record 417 manatee deaths in 2006, Governor Charlie Crist asked the FWC to reject the status change and the Commissioners complied. ''We need to protect these gentle creatures,'' said Governor Crist in a recent interview with the The Miami Herald.
The governor's stand was courageous and your outpouring of support gave him the encouragement he needed. In fact, the FWC reported that the governor's office received over 28,000 messages on manatees and the majority of them were in favor of keeping manatees designated as Endangered. With your help, we have accomplished a huge triumph for manatees!
Now we're asking you to make an extra donation. Manatees have a new window of opportunity and, with your assistance, we will have the resources to tackle some goals vital to their protection in the upcoming year:
- Obtain the revision of Florida's flawed imperiled species classification system so manatees and all of the state's imperiled species can be fairly reviewed, classified properly, and receive the protections they need.
- Ensure that the manatee management plan, which the Commission approved today, is fully funded and implemented.
- Increase efforts to conserve natural warm water springs and develop plans to prevent catastophic manatee die-offs should power plants go offline.
- Fight for more law enforcement positions so Florida's waterways will be safer for manatees and people.
- Expand our role in manatee rescue and rehabilitation efforts and prevent needless deaths of sick and injured manatees.
We are gearing up for a challenging year in 2008, and we need your help to accomplish these goals. The state downlisting issue has spanned six long years but, with your help, we have achieved a triumphant day for manatees. This success has been a long time coming, and we should all take a moment to celebrate. My sincerest thanks for your strong support and for sending us your generous contribution today so we can continue to safeguard the manatee's future.
Best wishes and happy holidays,
Patrick Rose, Aquatic Biologist Executive Director
P.S. Please make a tax-deductible donation today using our secure web site or call us at 1-800-432-JOIN (5646).
Please also take a couple of minutes to thank Governor Charlie Crist and the FWC Commission for their strong support of manatees:
Governor Charlie Crist PL-05 The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001 Phone: 850-488-7146 Fax: 850-487-0801 E-mail: Charlie.Crist@MyFlorida.com
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 Phone: 850-487-3796 Fax: 850-921-5786 E-mail: Commissioners@MyFWC.com
Click here to read highlights of our 2007 activities and accomplishments (pdf).
Contact us at education@savethemanatee.org
Sign up for our free Paddle Tales E-Newsletter: www.savethemanatee.org/enews_signup.htm
Our postal address is: 500 N. Maitland Ave.Maitland, Florida 32751United States
About SMCSave the Manatee Club is a nonprofit organization founded in 1981 by former Florida Governor and U.S. Senator Bob Graham and singer Jimmy Buffett. To learn more about manatees and our work, go to www.savethemanatee.org
Join Us!Adopt-A-Manatee and join Save the Manatee Club. Your contribution will support our work to help protect endangered manatees and their habitat. For more information, go to www.savethemanatee.org/adoptpag.htm
Pass It AlongHelp spread the word about manatees! Please forward this email to your family and friends.
Questions?If you have additional questions, please email us at education@savethemanatee.org
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Petition to stop Run_away Expansion
On Decimber 1, I posted a petition on thepetitionsite.com to try to put a stop to the totally unneccessary expansions of Port Everglades and Fort Lauderdale International Airport. I am looking for at least 50000 signatures, but the more the better.
We really need to let the Broward County Commission and the money-grabbers behind these expansions know that the environment is more important to us than their dreams of untold wealth.
Please visit thepetitionsite.com and sign the petition. The wildlife around Fort Lauderdale will thank you.
We really need to let the Broward County Commission and the money-grabbers behind these expansions know that the environment is more important to us than their dreams of untold wealth.
Please visit thepetitionsite.com and sign the petition. The wildlife around Fort Lauderdale will thank you.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Port Everglades/FLL Expansion
I wish to thank each and everyone who responded to my post on Ecospace.com. Your suggestions are extremely helpful, very encouraging and greatly appreciated. Single voices can sometimes be heard, but when we band together, our collective voices become a clamor that cannot be ignored.
The following are email addresses for the Broward County Commissioners and the Florida State reps. Copy and paste them into an email and send it to all at once.
ilieberman@broward.org;kjacobs@broward.org;sritter@broward.org;kkeechl@broward.org;lwexler@broward.org;
sgunzburger@broward.org;jrodstrom@broward.org;dwassermanrubin@broward.org;jeggelletion@broward.org
atwater.jeff.web@flsenate.gov;dawson.mandy.web@flsenate.gov;deutch.ted.web@flsenate.gov ;geller.steven.web@flsenate.gov ;ring.jeremy.web@ flsenate.gov ;rich.nan.web@flsenate.gov ;margolis.gwen.web@flsenate.gov;bullard.larcenia.web@flsenate.gov
The following are email addresses for the Broward County Commissioners and the Florida State reps. Copy and paste them into an email and send it to all at once.
ilieberman@broward.org;kjacobs@broward.org;sritter@broward.org;kkeechl@broward.org;lwexler@broward.org;
sgunzburger@broward.org;jrodstrom@broward.org;dwassermanrubin@broward.org;jeggelletion@broward.org
atwater.jeff.web@flsenate.gov;dawson.mandy.web@flsenate.gov;deutch.ted.web@flsenate.gov ;geller.steven.web@flsenate.gov ;ring.jeremy.web@ flsenate.gov ;rich.nan.web@flsenate.gov ;margolis.gwen.web@flsenate.gov;bullard.larcenia.web@flsenate.gov
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Port Everglades/FLL expansion
As you may or may not know, the Broward County Commission, The Port Everglades Management team, the FLL Management team, the Broward Alliance and the Broward Workshop are pushing for the dual expansions of Fort Lauderdale International Airport and Port Everglades that will essentially combine the facilities.
The effects on those who live in or plan to visit the Fort Lauderdale area for diving, snorkeling, fishing, bird-watching or just plain sight seeing, as well as the businesses that support these activities, will be eternal and irreparable.
There has been no plausible argument advanced to justify this expansion. It is fueled by greed and the desire of the proponents to satisfy personal goals. They attribute this desire to progress in order to cover their underlying motives.
Progress is not necessarily a bad thing, but when it comes as so great a cost to the environment, there must be a line drawn to separate the good from the evil. If such a line were to be drawn here, the evil far outweighs the good.
On the good side we have:
- Increased trade capabilities
- Increased leisure travel capabilities
- Increased profits for a select few whose pockets are already over-stuffed.
On the evil side, there are innumerable arguments, but a few of the more important are: - Eradication of protected mangroves, some of which are Essential Fish Habitat
- Loss of hatching and nursery habitat for numerous aquatic, terrestrial and avian species
- Destruction of Manatee habitat
- Decimation of 15 or more acres of our coral reef system
- Loss to the economy of fishing, diving, snorkeling, sightseeing and tourism industries
- Harmful increases in pollutants in an atmosphere that is already in the 94th percentile of the most polluted in Florida counties
- Increased traffic on a roadway system that is outmoded
- Increased risk of terrorism
- Increased noise pollution
- Loss of mobile home parks that cannot be mitigated for noise with no replacement housing for the affected families
- Impossibility of mitigating noise impacts on open areas such as parks, nature centers, public greenways, blue ways, residential yards and patios
- Detrimental effects from noise pollution on wildlife in the nature centers and wildlife habitat in general with no mitigation efforts even being considered
- Tremendous expense for expansions that haven't been proven necessary. The combined expansions will exceed $2 billion
- Probable damage to the potable water supply from leaching of toxins from dredged fill during dewatering and compaction processes
These are just a few of the negative effects of this so called "progress" which are of absolutely no consequence to the people behind the push for the entire project.
It is time that we who care about the environment voice our objections to the callous disregard with which the detrimental effects of the project are being treated by the proponents, just for the sake of adding a few more dollars into some already well-stuffed pockets. This is colossal and unforgivable.
Please pass this on to others that you know that care about our environment and write to your county and state representatives as well as the controlling agencies, and ask them to intervene.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
Plans for turning the closed Homestead Air Force Base into a commercial airport bogged down in 1998 over the possible environmental damage to two nearby national parks, when environmental groups concerned about noise, and air and water pollution in two national parks voiced strenuous objections to the negative environmental impact the facility would have on the flora and fauna of the area.
After gaining approval from the Federal Aviation Administration, the airport plan was subjected to further study to address concerns about how Biscayne National Park, two miles east of the base, and Everglades National Park, 10 miles to the west, would be affected by noise, air and water pollution from their new neighbor and the development expected to surround it. Plans called for the airport to handle more than 200,000 flights a year for passengers and cargo as well as attract new industry.
Miami-Dade County officials supported the airport plan as a way of relieving some of the traffic at Miami International Airport, 30 miles to the north, while helping to revitalize a hurricane-damaged area. In 1992, Hurricane Andrew inflicted more than $400 million in economic losses to south Florida; the Homestead Air Force Base, which provided about 5,000 military and civilian jobs, was so badly damaged that it had to close.
In 1994 the base was converted into an Air Force Reserves installation with about 2,000 people that now occupies about a third of the former base's 3,000 acres. Then Homestead Mayor, Steve Shiver said, "It's extremely important," referring to the airport. "It's not the single savior but it definitely puts us on the right track."
Federal studies to transfer 1,600 acres of the base to the county found the site compatible with a commercial regional airport, and the redevelopment plans won Miami-Dade County approval in 1996.
Conservationists, however, attacked the Federal Government's environmental report for failing to adequately address the effects on Biscayne National Park, a180, 000-acre Aquatic Park, and Everglades National Park, a wilderness park on 1.5 million acres of saw grass marshes, pineland, and mangrove and cypress swamps.
Critics saw the airport proposal as undermining the Federal Government's own multimillion-dollar restoration project to preserve the Everglades. The opponents, including the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society, said noise from passenger jets would surpass what the National Park Service considers acceptable. They also worried about degradation of water quality in Biscayne Bay, fuel dumping and collisions with birds.
Environmental concerns led the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration to review the project again, and the scope of the new study was expanded to consider adverse effects on agriculture and tourism, air travel safety and traffic. The study also looked into alternative uses for the site, including a theme park, a marine research center, a space launching facility, and other government and military use.
Public hearings were held on the study when was completed. Miami-Dade County officials still hoped to establish a commercial airport at the former Air Force base with minimal impact to the surroundings. They said they had been looking for 14 years for a site to accommodate overflow from Miami International. None of the county's three general aviation airports can be expanded, they said, because of their proximity to residential and business areas.
These same issues affect FLL expansion!
In the FLL expansion plan, it is not only the wildlife environment that is affected; there is the human element that is being ridden rough-shod over by a callous County Commission that sees quality of business ahead of quality of life.
Certainly, the people in the immediate vicinity of the airport will face issues such as noise, air and water pollution, deflated home values and increased risk of accident, but what the County Commission has failed to recognize is the fact that all of Broward County will be affected in varying degrees by the air and water pollution.
A study by the Clean Air Task force has determined that South Florida is already one area where the Estimated Cancer Risk from HAPs (hazardous air pollutants) is greater than 1 in 10,000, which places us in the highest 20% of states.
Lifetime Cancers per Million People in Broward County range from 318 from Inhaled diesel soot to 44 from other inhaled toxics The Clean Air Task Force determined that the cancer risk posed by diesel soot is higher than all other air toxics combined.
The calculated average US cancer risk of 363 cancers per million is over 8 times higher than the cancer risk of all other air toxics combined. The relative cancer risk of diesel PM (particulate matter) is calculated as a ratio of the cancer risk of diesel PM divided by the cancer risk of other air toxics tracked by EPA.
"We calculated the cancer risk for diesel PM in the US by multiplying the CA cancer unit risk for diesel PM by the average national ambient concentration for diesel PM from Aspen model results for 1999". According to the 1999 NATA the combined risk from all 133 other air toxics tracked by EPA is 41.5 per million. Note: this risk is for inhalation as the only route of exposure.
The relative ratio of national diesel soot risk to the risk of all other air toxics combined is therefore 363 / 41.5 = 8.75. County and state ratios were calculated similarly. MSA results were derived from the county-level data using population weighting.
How did CATF determine that the urban risk is 3 times higher than the rural risk?
Based on the single CARB unit risk multiplied by the average diesel soot concentration in the U.S., the nationwide average lifetime cancer risk posed by diesel exhaust is 363 cancers per million. In the analysis counties are designated as 'rural' or 'urban.' In the rural counties we estimate a risk of 142 cancers per million based on the average concentration in rural counties. In the urban counties, the risk is 415 cancers per million. The ratio of urban to rural risk 415/142 = 2.92, rounding up to a relative factor of 3.
In 2004, deaths from firearm homicide were 11,829; from HIV, 14,095; from workplace accidents, 5,307; while the deaths from toxic emissions were 23,600, only 7, 631 less than all of the other causes combined.
FLL and Port Everglades are in such close proximity, that when the expansions of each are completed, they will abut. Within Port Everglades existing footprint, there is a very large FP&L generating plant. Less than 4 miles west of there is another FP&L plant, and less than ½ mile west of that is a solid waste incinerator, putting the five highest pollutant generating facilities in Broward County within five miles of each other. When the existing pollution level is combined with the added pollution levels that the expansions will produce, the effect on people, wildlife and habitat will be disastrous.
Within a five mile radius of this pollution center are located John U Lloyd State Park, The Anne Kolb Nature Center, West Lake Park, Frost Park, T Y Park, Snyder Park, Secret Woods Nature Center, and four major golf facilities. To add icing on the cake, the whole area is surrounded by the Broward Urban Trails "New River Loop", which is designated a National Protected Area.
With the variable winds common to South Florida, the pollution risk is not restricted to the immediate vicinity, but will affect all of Broward County and parts of Miami Dade County as well, subjecting well over two million people, as well as the avian, marine and terrestrial wildlife,
to elevated risk from pollution induced illnesses.
As stewards of the earth and of our own destinies, we cannot and must not allow this to happen for the sake of putting a few more dollars into some already well-stuffed pockets.
After gaining approval from the Federal Aviation Administration, the airport plan was subjected to further study to address concerns about how Biscayne National Park, two miles east of the base, and Everglades National Park, 10 miles to the west, would be affected by noise, air and water pollution from their new neighbor and the development expected to surround it. Plans called for the airport to handle more than 200,000 flights a year for passengers and cargo as well as attract new industry.
Miami-Dade County officials supported the airport plan as a way of relieving some of the traffic at Miami International Airport, 30 miles to the north, while helping to revitalize a hurricane-damaged area. In 1992, Hurricane Andrew inflicted more than $400 million in economic losses to south Florida; the Homestead Air Force Base, which provided about 5,000 military and civilian jobs, was so badly damaged that it had to close.
In 1994 the base was converted into an Air Force Reserves installation with about 2,000 people that now occupies about a third of the former base's 3,000 acres. Then Homestead Mayor, Steve Shiver said, "It's extremely important," referring to the airport. "It's not the single savior but it definitely puts us on the right track."
Federal studies to transfer 1,600 acres of the base to the county found the site compatible with a commercial regional airport, and the redevelopment plans won Miami-Dade County approval in 1996.
Conservationists, however, attacked the Federal Government's environmental report for failing to adequately address the effects on Biscayne National Park, a180, 000-acre Aquatic Park, and Everglades National Park, a wilderness park on 1.5 million acres of saw grass marshes, pineland, and mangrove and cypress swamps.
Critics saw the airport proposal as undermining the Federal Government's own multimillion-dollar restoration project to preserve the Everglades. The opponents, including the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society, said noise from passenger jets would surpass what the National Park Service considers acceptable. They also worried about degradation of water quality in Biscayne Bay, fuel dumping and collisions with birds.
Environmental concerns led the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration to review the project again, and the scope of the new study was expanded to consider adverse effects on agriculture and tourism, air travel safety and traffic. The study also looked into alternative uses for the site, including a theme park, a marine research center, a space launching facility, and other government and military use.
Public hearings were held on the study when was completed. Miami-Dade County officials still hoped to establish a commercial airport at the former Air Force base with minimal impact to the surroundings. They said they had been looking for 14 years for a site to accommodate overflow from Miami International. None of the county's three general aviation airports can be expanded, they said, because of their proximity to residential and business areas.
These same issues affect FLL expansion!
In the FLL expansion plan, it is not only the wildlife environment that is affected; there is the human element that is being ridden rough-shod over by a callous County Commission that sees quality of business ahead of quality of life.
Certainly, the people in the immediate vicinity of the airport will face issues such as noise, air and water pollution, deflated home values and increased risk of accident, but what the County Commission has failed to recognize is the fact that all of Broward County will be affected in varying degrees by the air and water pollution.
A study by the Clean Air Task force has determined that South Florida is already one area where the Estimated Cancer Risk from HAPs (hazardous air pollutants) is greater than 1 in 10,000, which places us in the highest 20% of states.
Lifetime Cancers per Million People in Broward County range from 318 from Inhaled diesel soot to 44 from other inhaled toxics The Clean Air Task Force determined that the cancer risk posed by diesel soot is higher than all other air toxics combined.
The calculated average US cancer risk of 363 cancers per million is over 8 times higher than the cancer risk of all other air toxics combined. The relative cancer risk of diesel PM (particulate matter) is calculated as a ratio of the cancer risk of diesel PM divided by the cancer risk of other air toxics tracked by EPA.
"We calculated the cancer risk for diesel PM in the US by multiplying the CA cancer unit risk for diesel PM by the average national ambient concentration for diesel PM from Aspen model results for 1999". According to the 1999 NATA the combined risk from all 133 other air toxics tracked by EPA is 41.5 per million. Note: this risk is for inhalation as the only route of exposure.
The relative ratio of national diesel soot risk to the risk of all other air toxics combined is therefore 363 / 41.5 = 8.75. County and state ratios were calculated similarly. MSA results were derived from the county-level data using population weighting.
How did CATF determine that the urban risk is 3 times higher than the rural risk?
Based on the single CARB unit risk multiplied by the average diesel soot concentration in the U.S., the nationwide average lifetime cancer risk posed by diesel exhaust is 363 cancers per million. In the analysis counties are designated as 'rural' or 'urban.' In the rural counties we estimate a risk of 142 cancers per million based on the average concentration in rural counties. In the urban counties, the risk is 415 cancers per million. The ratio of urban to rural risk 415/142 = 2.92, rounding up to a relative factor of 3.
In 2004, deaths from firearm homicide were 11,829; from HIV, 14,095; from workplace accidents, 5,307; while the deaths from toxic emissions were 23,600, only 7, 631 less than all of the other causes combined.
FLL and Port Everglades are in such close proximity, that when the expansions of each are completed, they will abut. Within Port Everglades existing footprint, there is a very large FP&L generating plant. Less than 4 miles west of there is another FP&L plant, and less than ½ mile west of that is a solid waste incinerator, putting the five highest pollutant generating facilities in Broward County within five miles of each other. When the existing pollution level is combined with the added pollution levels that the expansions will produce, the effect on people, wildlife and habitat will be disastrous.
Within a five mile radius of this pollution center are located John U Lloyd State Park, The Anne Kolb Nature Center, West Lake Park, Frost Park, T Y Park, Snyder Park, Secret Woods Nature Center, and four major golf facilities. To add icing on the cake, the whole area is surrounded by the Broward Urban Trails "New River Loop", which is designated a National Protected Area.
With the variable winds common to South Florida, the pollution risk is not restricted to the immediate vicinity, but will affect all of Broward County and parts of Miami Dade County as well, subjecting well over two million people, as well as the avian, marine and terrestrial wildlife,
to elevated risk from pollution induced illnesses.
As stewards of the earth and of our own destinies, we cannot and must not allow this to happen for the sake of putting a few more dollars into some already well-stuffed pockets.
Monday, October 22, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
Those who have followed my blogs for any length of time know that I am an avid environmentalist, and that this is the impetus for this blog in particular.
The Broward County Commission made the decision in June to allow the runway extension to extend into the smooth-billed ani's habitat east of the airport which will also affect the unconfirmed nesting area in John U Lloyd state park. The smooth-bill is rare in Broward County, and I personally don't see any difference between protecting their habitat and that of the Northern Spotted Owl.
Also, east of the airport and in the way of the runway, is a nesting ground for the Florida Burrowing Ground Owl, a protected species. They insist that the owls will be moved to a different area, but I think the owls are there because that is where the wish to be. Their needs are satisfied there, and if they are relocated, they are sure to try to return there and will certainly be in harms way.
Couple this with the fact that Port Everglades is expanding westward virtually to the end of the runway, and the last of the mangroves in the Dania Beach area will be decimated, along with the ecosystem supported there. It's bad enough that the runway expansion will eliminate 15 acres of wetlands, and I think that we need to come together and put a stop to this callous destruction of our environment.
If anyone wants to comment, they can e-mail the FAA at
FLL-EIScomments@landrum-brown.com
Although this has nothing to do with the runway expansion, It is a possible detriment to the environment of broward county, and every fiber of my being shudders to think of the precedent that might be set if this is allowed to pass. Please join with us in asking the Fort Lauderdale City Commission to reject this potential rape of our already diminished wetlands. The only void to be filled by this action is in the developers' wallet.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Action Alert: Time for YOUR Comments!
Public comment needed by Tuesday, October 23!A developer has applied to the Army Corps of Engineers for permission to fill in 8 acres of wetlands directly across the Intracoastal Waterway from Hugh Taylor Birch State Park, in order to create an island for single family housing.
The island would have almost 2,750 feet of seawall, and would destroy almost 6 acres of seagrass and other marine benthic habitat, negatively impacting the endangered Small-toothed Sawfish and West Indian Manatee.
The park recently completed a restoration project that improved water flow and tidal exchange, but construction of an artificial island would increase turbidity, decreasing photosynthesis and suffocating the submerged aquatic vegetation which serves as an essential fish habitat.In addition, an increase in boat traffic, combined with the presence of seawalls on both sides of the Intracoastal Waterway, would hasten the deterioration of the seawalls as boat wakes constantly batter the seawalls and undermine their foundations. The increased wave action would also contribute to an increase in water turbidity.
What can you do about it?The Army Corps of Engineers is accepting public comments on this project through October 23. Please write to Leah Oberlin at the Army Corps of Engineers at Leah.A.Oberlin@saj02.usace.army.mil to express your opinion about the negative impacts of the proposed development. In addition to the Army Corps of Engineers, you may wish to bring this to the attention of the Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale and the Broward County Commission, your state and federal congressional officials, Governor Crist, and any others in a position to help.
You can read the official public notice here.
The sample letter below was supplied by Cry of the Water.
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear Ms. Oberlin,Please deny the application for Sunrise Bay SAJ-2007-57.
Initial determination by the Corps is that the proposed action could have substantial adverse impact on Essential Fish Habitat and federally managed fish in the South Atlantic region, yet the Corps is rejecting the need for a EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). If this project is not denied a full EIS should be conducted on this project.
The cumulative loss of habitat in Broward County continues to have a detrimental effect on our county's natural resources.Hugh Taylor Birch State Park contains several native biological communities including sections of mangroves along the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) providing habitat for several species of herons, other shoreline animals, juvenile breeding grounds for fish species and several endangered and threatened animals and plants.
Construction of an island across from the park could have detrimental affects on this sensitive habitat.Public notice of this project did not include where the fill material to create an island within the bay would come from and if any dredging would take place. Dredging, trucking or bringing in the fill by barge will have different impacts to the surrounding area and was not explained in the notice.The bay area to be filled is part of a tidal system and the loss of the this system will have a cascading affect on local marine fisheries.
Destruction of 8 acres of Seagrass and other benthic habitat is unacceptable.Broward County's uncontrollable growth is putting a strain on all our resources and infrastructure, filling the bays along the ICW for housing will add to the loss of natural resources that we cannot afford to lose.
Fertilizer runoff from homes along the Intracoastal is already affecting our waterways this new source so close to the park will only add to the impacts.I am requesting that a public hearing be held in Broward County.
The reasons for the hearing are that:
1) this project will affect a large number of people in adjacent communities that have a right to be heard on this issue.
2) This project may affect navigation on the ICW.
3) As we reach build out in Broward County this project will encourage builders to fill in our wetlands and waterways for additional building sites.
4) Project will affect sovereign submerged land and marine and Essential Fish Habitat.
Thank you,
Name & Address
Posted by Jonathan Estrin at: http://www.browardaudubon.blogspot.com/ Feel free to visit Jonathan and Heidi's blog and look around. There is much of interest there, and they have links to other sites that are informative as well as enjoyable.
Feel free to respond to this posting, or email me at grantcampbel_1@yahoo.com
The Broward County Commission made the decision in June to allow the runway extension to extend into the smooth-billed ani's habitat east of the airport which will also affect the unconfirmed nesting area in John U Lloyd state park. The smooth-bill is rare in Broward County, and I personally don't see any difference between protecting their habitat and that of the Northern Spotted Owl.
Also, east of the airport and in the way of the runway, is a nesting ground for the Florida Burrowing Ground Owl, a protected species. They insist that the owls will be moved to a different area, but I think the owls are there because that is where the wish to be. Their needs are satisfied there, and if they are relocated, they are sure to try to return there and will certainly be in harms way.
Couple this with the fact that Port Everglades is expanding westward virtually to the end of the runway, and the last of the mangroves in the Dania Beach area will be decimated, along with the ecosystem supported there. It's bad enough that the runway expansion will eliminate 15 acres of wetlands, and I think that we need to come together and put a stop to this callous destruction of our environment.
If anyone wants to comment, they can e-mail the FAA at
FLL-EIScomments@landrum-brown.com
Although this has nothing to do with the runway expansion, It is a possible detriment to the environment of broward county, and every fiber of my being shudders to think of the precedent that might be set if this is allowed to pass. Please join with us in asking the Fort Lauderdale City Commission to reject this potential rape of our already diminished wetlands. The only void to be filled by this action is in the developers' wallet.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Action Alert: Time for YOUR Comments!
Public comment needed by Tuesday, October 23!A developer has applied to the Army Corps of Engineers for permission to fill in 8 acres of wetlands directly across the Intracoastal Waterway from Hugh Taylor Birch State Park, in order to create an island for single family housing.
The island would have almost 2,750 feet of seawall, and would destroy almost 6 acres of seagrass and other marine benthic habitat, negatively impacting the endangered Small-toothed Sawfish and West Indian Manatee.
The park recently completed a restoration project that improved water flow and tidal exchange, but construction of an artificial island would increase turbidity, decreasing photosynthesis and suffocating the submerged aquatic vegetation which serves as an essential fish habitat.In addition, an increase in boat traffic, combined with the presence of seawalls on both sides of the Intracoastal Waterway, would hasten the deterioration of the seawalls as boat wakes constantly batter the seawalls and undermine their foundations. The increased wave action would also contribute to an increase in water turbidity.
What can you do about it?The Army Corps of Engineers is accepting public comments on this project through October 23. Please write to Leah Oberlin at the Army Corps of Engineers at Leah.A.Oberlin@saj02.usace.army.mil to express your opinion about the negative impacts of the proposed development. In addition to the Army Corps of Engineers, you may wish to bring this to the attention of the Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale and the Broward County Commission, your state and federal congressional officials, Governor Crist, and any others in a position to help.
You can read the official public notice here.
The sample letter below was supplied by Cry of the Water.
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear Ms. Oberlin,Please deny the application for Sunrise Bay SAJ-2007-57.
Initial determination by the Corps is that the proposed action could have substantial adverse impact on Essential Fish Habitat and federally managed fish in the South Atlantic region, yet the Corps is rejecting the need for a EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). If this project is not denied a full EIS should be conducted on this project.
The cumulative loss of habitat in Broward County continues to have a detrimental effect on our county's natural resources.Hugh Taylor Birch State Park contains several native biological communities including sections of mangroves along the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) providing habitat for several species of herons, other shoreline animals, juvenile breeding grounds for fish species and several endangered and threatened animals and plants.
Construction of an island across from the park could have detrimental affects on this sensitive habitat.Public notice of this project did not include where the fill material to create an island within the bay would come from and if any dredging would take place. Dredging, trucking or bringing in the fill by barge will have different impacts to the surrounding area and was not explained in the notice.The bay area to be filled is part of a tidal system and the loss of the this system will have a cascading affect on local marine fisheries.
Destruction of 8 acres of Seagrass and other benthic habitat is unacceptable.Broward County's uncontrollable growth is putting a strain on all our resources and infrastructure, filling the bays along the ICW for housing will add to the loss of natural resources that we cannot afford to lose.
Fertilizer runoff from homes along the Intracoastal is already affecting our waterways this new source so close to the park will only add to the impacts.I am requesting that a public hearing be held in Broward County.
The reasons for the hearing are that:
1) this project will affect a large number of people in adjacent communities that have a right to be heard on this issue.
2) This project may affect navigation on the ICW.
3) As we reach build out in Broward County this project will encourage builders to fill in our wetlands and waterways for additional building sites.
4) Project will affect sovereign submerged land and marine and Essential Fish Habitat.
Thank you,
Name & Address
Posted by Jonathan Estrin at: http://www.browardaudubon.blogspot.com/ Feel free to visit Jonathan and Heidi's blog and look around. There is much of interest there, and they have links to other sites that are informative as well as enjoyable.
Feel free to respond to this posting, or email me at grantcampbel_1@yahoo.com
Sunday, October 14, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
Good old Boys
I believe that The Broward Workshop coupled with the Broward Alliance is actually a "good old boy network" in disguise. Nearly 20% of the members are in both groups, and they serve together in mixed groups on various inter-related boards and committees. Their motives are somewhat self serving, as each looks out for the other. The bulk of the group consists of contractors, realtors, accountants, hoteliers, and insurers that stand to reap monstrous profits from the expansion at FLL, and the more expensive the expansion program, the higher the anticipated profit.
They, as a group, have endorsed the south runway expansion plan, most likely because it is an extremely high dollar pork barrel project, and because this plan does not involve the inconveniencing of fellow members at the airport itself. Without a doubt, some of the members are honest to a fault, but vast sums of money bring out the larceny in the best of people.
The FAA is about to drop something over $650,000,000.00 for the runway expansion, but when you factor in the cost overruns, graft, kickbacks and payola inherent to a government project of this magnitude, not to mention the annual rise in construction costs in a long term project, I expect the total cost to be well in excess of $1,000,000,000.00. Needless to say, when this kind of money is involved, people line up like vultures on a limb to try to grab as much of it as they possibly can.
These are the people that have used their influence to sway the judgment of unsuspecting dupes like the Tamarac Yellow Shirt Brigade to lend credence to the decision of an inept County Commission in approving the south runway expansion plan. The only real involvement these public spirited citizens will ever have with FLL will be to pay their relative portion when the final bill is due. The FAA is supposedly footing the bill, but the money the FAA uses comes from the people who fly in or out of our airports, in the form of departure taxes and other miscellaneous user fees. Our great-grandchildren will still be paying the tab when they are senior citizens.
Choosing the most expensive alternative provides the most opportunities for the most people to siphon off the most money, and the process may well have already started. All of the Commissioners that voted for the south runway expansion have dubious ties to the construction management firm that oversees all of the construction at FLL, a fact that I find outrageous. Elected officials promise to serve the people who elect them, not their own interests.
As time progresses, it becomes increasingly evident that in pushing for the construction of the south runway, the north runway option lurks in the background for future expansion. Once the south runway is completed, the way will be clear to then move the facilities that are presently in the way of the north runway expansion to the currently available 40 acres on the south side of the airport and then reconstruct the north runway, giving FLL 3 runways that, although are still inadequate to handle the New Larger Aircraft, are yet large enough as pork barrel projects to provide the opportunity for several people in the "good old boy" network to become extremely wealthy.
If the north runway were to be built first, there is a possibility, perhaps even a probability, that the south runway would not be built. By pushing the south runway option, the more lucrative opportunities are insured. I am sure that the Commission members that voted for the south runway are aware of this and don't want the possibilities for financial gain to slip from their grasp.
Somewhat under the radar, but at the same time, these same people are working toward the expansion of Port Everglades, which will essentially combine both facilities, separated only by the electrical transmission lines from the Port Everglades FP&L plant. Again this expansion is fueled more by greed than by need. No plausible argument has been advanced that shows an actual need for expansion, only the desires of the Broward County Commission and the Port Everglades Management team, and of course, the people that stand to reap the concomitant profits.
The public is being misinformed about the negative aspects of this expansion plan, by omission. No one has mentioned the fact that Port Everglades, FLL and two FP&L plants, the four largest contributors of atmospheric pollution in Broward County, are within four miles of each other, and although FP&L has made tremendous strides in reducing their pollutant contribution, when the present emissions are to be combined with the elevated emissions that will be contributed by the expanded Port and Airport, the effect will be devastating to humans, wildlife and vegetation, and with our variable winds, it will affect all of Broward County.
Broward County presently ranks fourth in 67 counties in the state and two-hundredth in 3,109 counties nationally in pollution, placing us in the 94th percentile. The average lifetime cancer risk from diesel soot for a resident of Broward County is 1 in 3,142. This risk is 318 times greater than the EPA's acceptable level of 1 in 1 million, and exceeds the risk of all other airborne toxins tracked by the EPA combined. This is of little consequence to the mercenary thinking prevalent in the "good old boys network" who seem to share the opinion of Chairman Mao, who, in a 1960 speech, declared that the "environment is here for the plundering".
"Protecting the environment through structural considerations and operational practices is another initiative that the Port Department is pursuing as the Master Plan is developed. We are also making environmental protection, maintenance and enhancement an important component of Port Everglades’ future development,” Port Everglades Director Phillip C. Allen said, adding that the Port Department recently hosted a workshop to ask the local community and environmental experts for their input about how they believe the Port can progress while remaining a good environmental steward.
The last remaining wetlands in the Dania Beach area lie between the airport and the Intracoastal Waterway, but with the combined expansions, the whole ecosystem supported by the mangrove swamps will be obliterated, and cannot be mitigated These mangroves are already a threatened species, but in some peoples minds, they are standing in the way of progress.
There is a misconception that this environmental damage will be mitigated by enhancing West Lake Park, but wildlife chooses its' environment because the needs are satisfied by a particular set of circumstances, and if those needs were met by the conditions at West Lake Park, the wildlife would already be there. The same can be said for the dredging of Port Everglades, the Intracoastal Waterway or the Dania Cutoff Canal. The mix of wildlife will be changed forever because the conditions will no longer suit the present mix. Port Everglades, for example, is a noted breeding ground for sharks, but in adding six feet to the overall depth, the water temperature, the bottom conditions and the vegetation will all be moderated, and a whole new ecosystem will evolve. Any dredged area will suffer the same consequences. It's all well and good to say you will mitigate, but in the end the choice is not ours.
The Florida coastal reef system is the only reef system on the east coast of the US, and when it is damaged by a ship grounding, the shipping company is charged thousands of dollars in fines for a couple hundred feet of damage, but these forward thinking people plan to decimate 15 acres of this already threatened ecosystem in the deepening and widening of the port entrance. There is no mitigation for damage that extensive. Once it is gone, it is gone forever.
The fill purloined by this proposed dredging is to be utilized in the building of the elevated runway at FLL, but dredged fill must be allowed to dry prior to its' use as structural fill, a process that could take years. The bottom dwellers, shellfish and vegetation unfortunate enough to be vacuumed up in the dredging process will be ground into fish meal as it passes through the pumps and become part of the fill. During the drying process, this soup will be left to rot, and the odor will be unbearable.
If any prior chemical or toxic spills ever occurred within the dredging area, the toxins that settle to the bottom will also become part of the fill, and during the drying process, these salts, toxins and rotted flesh and vegetation will leach into the soil and will very likely find its way into our potable water supply. The toxic matter that doesn't leach out during the drying period will, in all probability, be washed into the aquifer in the compaction that must take place to stabilize the fill.
The compaction process will require the use of in excess of 234,000,000 gallons of water at a time when South Florida is in the worst water crisis in recorded history. Coincidentally, the Dania Beach area is currently enforcing the most stringent water restrictions in Broward County. Where is the logic in letting our plants and lawns die of thirst while wasting nearly 10% of the total water used in Broward County in all of 1994, the last year that I could find figures for, and when there were no water restrictions.
6,000,000 cubic yards of fill, no matter where procured, would be far better used in the current Everglades restoration project in filling in some of the canals dug without foresight, and allowed by a previous short-sighted Commission. The restoration project is at a virtual standstill for a variety of reasons, one of which is a shortage of fill. Must we allow a project that has been proven necessary to languish and begin one that may or may not be necessary? A previous document from the FAA states that runway expansion at FLL will increase capacity 0%.
The inexhaustible supply of limestone in Dade County is becoming exhausted and the limestone pits will be forced to shut down in the not-too-distant future. Plans call for using some of the remaining limestone supply as fill in Port Everglades to build an area for the importation of limestone. What will that do for construction costs that have historically escalated at a rate between 2% and 8% annually? The construction phases of both projects are expected to take from 5 to 8 years, and rising costs could add from $400,000,000.00 to $500,000,000.00 to the total cost of each project. Nearly $1,000,000,000.00 in cost overruns.
We do not own this world. We only borrow it from future generations, and we, as the Earth's stewards, must learn from past mistakes and prevent damage of this nature from happening. We owe it to our heirs.
Grant Campbell
2321 SW 44 St
Dania Beach, Fl. 33312
954-989-4921
grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com
I believe that The Broward Workshop coupled with the Broward Alliance is actually a "good old boy network" in disguise. Nearly 20% of the members are in both groups, and they serve together in mixed groups on various inter-related boards and committees. Their motives are somewhat self serving, as each looks out for the other. The bulk of the group consists of contractors, realtors, accountants, hoteliers, and insurers that stand to reap monstrous profits from the expansion at FLL, and the more expensive the expansion program, the higher the anticipated profit.
They, as a group, have endorsed the south runway expansion plan, most likely because it is an extremely high dollar pork barrel project, and because this plan does not involve the inconveniencing of fellow members at the airport itself. Without a doubt, some of the members are honest to a fault, but vast sums of money bring out the larceny in the best of people.
The FAA is about to drop something over $650,000,000.00 for the runway expansion, but when you factor in the cost overruns, graft, kickbacks and payola inherent to a government project of this magnitude, not to mention the annual rise in construction costs in a long term project, I expect the total cost to be well in excess of $1,000,000,000.00. Needless to say, when this kind of money is involved, people line up like vultures on a limb to try to grab as much of it as they possibly can.
These are the people that have used their influence to sway the judgment of unsuspecting dupes like the Tamarac Yellow Shirt Brigade to lend credence to the decision of an inept County Commission in approving the south runway expansion plan. The only real involvement these public spirited citizens will ever have with FLL will be to pay their relative portion when the final bill is due. The FAA is supposedly footing the bill, but the money the FAA uses comes from the people who fly in or out of our airports, in the form of departure taxes and other miscellaneous user fees. Our great-grandchildren will still be paying the tab when they are senior citizens.
Choosing the most expensive alternative provides the most opportunities for the most people to siphon off the most money, and the process may well have already started. All of the Commissioners that voted for the south runway expansion have dubious ties to the construction management firm that oversees all of the construction at FLL, a fact that I find outrageous. Elected officials promise to serve the people who elect them, not their own interests.
As time progresses, it becomes increasingly evident that in pushing for the construction of the south runway, the north runway option lurks in the background for future expansion. Once the south runway is completed, the way will be clear to then move the facilities that are presently in the way of the north runway expansion to the currently available 40 acres on the south side of the airport and then reconstruct the north runway, giving FLL 3 runways that, although are still inadequate to handle the New Larger Aircraft, are yet large enough as pork barrel projects to provide the opportunity for several people in the "good old boy" network to become extremely wealthy.
If the north runway were to be built first, there is a possibility, perhaps even a probability, that the south runway would not be built. By pushing the south runway option, the more lucrative opportunities are insured. I am sure that the Commission members that voted for the south runway are aware of this and don't want the possibilities for financial gain to slip from their grasp.
Somewhat under the radar, but at the same time, these same people are working toward the expansion of Port Everglades, which will essentially combine both facilities, separated only by the electrical transmission lines from the Port Everglades FP&L plant. Again this expansion is fueled more by greed than by need. No plausible argument has been advanced that shows an actual need for expansion, only the desires of the Broward County Commission and the Port Everglades Management team, and of course, the people that stand to reap the concomitant profits.
The public is being misinformed about the negative aspects of this expansion plan, by omission. No one has mentioned the fact that Port Everglades, FLL and two FP&L plants, the four largest contributors of atmospheric pollution in Broward County, are within four miles of each other, and although FP&L has made tremendous strides in reducing their pollutant contribution, when the present emissions are to be combined with the elevated emissions that will be contributed by the expanded Port and Airport, the effect will be devastating to humans, wildlife and vegetation, and with our variable winds, it will affect all of Broward County.
Broward County presently ranks fourth in 67 counties in the state and two-hundredth in 3,109 counties nationally in pollution, placing us in the 94th percentile. The average lifetime cancer risk from diesel soot for a resident of Broward County is 1 in 3,142. This risk is 318 times greater than the EPA's acceptable level of 1 in 1 million, and exceeds the risk of all other airborne toxins tracked by the EPA combined. This is of little consequence to the mercenary thinking prevalent in the "good old boys network" who seem to share the opinion of Chairman Mao, who, in a 1960 speech, declared that the "environment is here for the plundering".
"Protecting the environment through structural considerations and operational practices is another initiative that the Port Department is pursuing as the Master Plan is developed. We are also making environmental protection, maintenance and enhancement an important component of Port Everglades’ future development,” Port Everglades Director Phillip C. Allen said, adding that the Port Department recently hosted a workshop to ask the local community and environmental experts for their input about how they believe the Port can progress while remaining a good environmental steward.
The last remaining wetlands in the Dania Beach area lie between the airport and the Intracoastal Waterway, but with the combined expansions, the whole ecosystem supported by the mangrove swamps will be obliterated, and cannot be mitigated These mangroves are already a threatened species, but in some peoples minds, they are standing in the way of progress.
There is a misconception that this environmental damage will be mitigated by enhancing West Lake Park, but wildlife chooses its' environment because the needs are satisfied by a particular set of circumstances, and if those needs were met by the conditions at West Lake Park, the wildlife would already be there. The same can be said for the dredging of Port Everglades, the Intracoastal Waterway or the Dania Cutoff Canal. The mix of wildlife will be changed forever because the conditions will no longer suit the present mix. Port Everglades, for example, is a noted breeding ground for sharks, but in adding six feet to the overall depth, the water temperature, the bottom conditions and the vegetation will all be moderated, and a whole new ecosystem will evolve. Any dredged area will suffer the same consequences. It's all well and good to say you will mitigate, but in the end the choice is not ours.
The Florida coastal reef system is the only reef system on the east coast of the US, and when it is damaged by a ship grounding, the shipping company is charged thousands of dollars in fines for a couple hundred feet of damage, but these forward thinking people plan to decimate 15 acres of this already threatened ecosystem in the deepening and widening of the port entrance. There is no mitigation for damage that extensive. Once it is gone, it is gone forever.
The fill purloined by this proposed dredging is to be utilized in the building of the elevated runway at FLL, but dredged fill must be allowed to dry prior to its' use as structural fill, a process that could take years. The bottom dwellers, shellfish and vegetation unfortunate enough to be vacuumed up in the dredging process will be ground into fish meal as it passes through the pumps and become part of the fill. During the drying process, this soup will be left to rot, and the odor will be unbearable.
If any prior chemical or toxic spills ever occurred within the dredging area, the toxins that settle to the bottom will also become part of the fill, and during the drying process, these salts, toxins and rotted flesh and vegetation will leach into the soil and will very likely find its way into our potable water supply. The toxic matter that doesn't leach out during the drying period will, in all probability, be washed into the aquifer in the compaction that must take place to stabilize the fill.
The compaction process will require the use of in excess of 234,000,000 gallons of water at a time when South Florida is in the worst water crisis in recorded history. Coincidentally, the Dania Beach area is currently enforcing the most stringent water restrictions in Broward County. Where is the logic in letting our plants and lawns die of thirst while wasting nearly 10% of the total water used in Broward County in all of 1994, the last year that I could find figures for, and when there were no water restrictions.
6,000,000 cubic yards of fill, no matter where procured, would be far better used in the current Everglades restoration project in filling in some of the canals dug without foresight, and allowed by a previous short-sighted Commission. The restoration project is at a virtual standstill for a variety of reasons, one of which is a shortage of fill. Must we allow a project that has been proven necessary to languish and begin one that may or may not be necessary? A previous document from the FAA states that runway expansion at FLL will increase capacity 0%.
The inexhaustible supply of limestone in Dade County is becoming exhausted and the limestone pits will be forced to shut down in the not-too-distant future. Plans call for using some of the remaining limestone supply as fill in Port Everglades to build an area for the importation of limestone. What will that do for construction costs that have historically escalated at a rate between 2% and 8% annually? The construction phases of both projects are expected to take from 5 to 8 years, and rising costs could add from $400,000,000.00 to $500,000,000.00 to the total cost of each project. Nearly $1,000,000,000.00 in cost overruns.
We do not own this world. We only borrow it from future generations, and we, as the Earth's stewards, must learn from past mistakes and prevent damage of this nature from happening. We owe it to our heirs.
Grant Campbell
2321 SW 44 St
Dania Beach, Fl. 33312
954-989-4921
grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com
Saturday, October 6, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
All of the Broward County Commissioners that voted in favor of the south runway expansion have at one time espoused the preservation of the environment in Broward County. I may be wrong, but this seems to be a direct contradiction of terms. In fact, the entire concept is riddled with contradictions.
You can't expand the runway and protect the environment at the same time because you must destroy part of the environment to effect the expansion. Not only are 15 acres of sensitive wetlands directly affected, but another 151 acres of land would need to be excavated to a depth of 25 feet to provide the necessary fill, possibly affecting even more wetlands.
This lake would eliminate land that the developers are already fighting for to build houses for the people that the proposed runway is anticipated to bring to Broward County.
In view of the fact that there is no land area of this consequence within reasonable trucking distance of FLL, these guardians of the environment have taken it upon themselves to decimate the marine environment of the Intracoastal Waterway by dredging the section from Port Everglades to the north side of Las Olas Boulevard to obtain the fill necessary to build a runway that has yet to be proven to be necessary in the first place.
If the fill is to be drained and dried in-situ, the salts and toxins that will leach out of the wet fill will pose a definite threat to our potable water supply, but even if the fill is to be trucked in, which presents another set of problems, the compaction process will still leach out some salts and toxins that didn't leach out during the drying process.
There is some conjecture as to dredging the entire fill from Port Everglades, but the same conditions apply no mater where we dredge it from. Port Everglades has its own unique environment as well as any other area and if we damage the wildlife or the habitat, the whole eco-system suffers. This dredging would add nearly six feet to the overall depth of the port which will change the mix of marine life that inhabits the port, particularly in regard to bottom dwellers.
If any thought has been given to the wildlife or its' habitat that will be irreparably damaged in the process, it was quickly pushed aside in favor of the possibility of advancing personal goals. The Commission has decided that the runway is to be built, and that is to be the end of it. It seems to me that the FAA is about to toss a billion dollars in the air, and everyone is poised to grab as much of it as possible.
I fail to see the need for any expansion, when increasing efficiency at the airport will solve more problems than airport expansion ever will. It defies logic to expand the runway system when the FAA has said in an earlier report that the runway expansion would increase airport capacity 0%, yet the FAA is solidly behind the proposed expansion. Yet another contradiction.
The necessity of any expansion has yet to be demonstrated, but if expansion were proven to be necessary, where is the logic in opting for the alternative that will affect the most citizens, the most endangered habitat, is the most costly in terms of time as well as money, presents the highest risk to the safety ofpeople and equipment, is the most vulnerable to terrorism and unnecessarily enlarges the footprint of the airport?
Gary Boettcher, the president of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations said in addressing safety concerns put to him in regard to the south runway, "We land commercial a/c on runways only 5500 feet long with varying degrees of slope on both ends."
You can't expand the runway and protect the environment at the same time because you must destroy part of the environment to effect the expansion. Not only are 15 acres of sensitive wetlands directly affected, but another 151 acres of land would need to be excavated to a depth of 25 feet to provide the necessary fill, possibly affecting even more wetlands.
This lake would eliminate land that the developers are already fighting for to build houses for the people that the proposed runway is anticipated to bring to Broward County.
In view of the fact that there is no land area of this consequence within reasonable trucking distance of FLL, these guardians of the environment have taken it upon themselves to decimate the marine environment of the Intracoastal Waterway by dredging the section from Port Everglades to the north side of Las Olas Boulevard to obtain the fill necessary to build a runway that has yet to be proven to be necessary in the first place.
If the fill is to be drained and dried in-situ, the salts and toxins that will leach out of the wet fill will pose a definite threat to our potable water supply, but even if the fill is to be trucked in, which presents another set of problems, the compaction process will still leach out some salts and toxins that didn't leach out during the drying process.
There is some conjecture as to dredging the entire fill from Port Everglades, but the same conditions apply no mater where we dredge it from. Port Everglades has its own unique environment as well as any other area and if we damage the wildlife or the habitat, the whole eco-system suffers. This dredging would add nearly six feet to the overall depth of the port which will change the mix of marine life that inhabits the port, particularly in regard to bottom dwellers.
If any thought has been given to the wildlife or its' habitat that will be irreparably damaged in the process, it was quickly pushed aside in favor of the possibility of advancing personal goals. The Commission has decided that the runway is to be built, and that is to be the end of it. It seems to me that the FAA is about to toss a billion dollars in the air, and everyone is poised to grab as much of it as possible.
I fail to see the need for any expansion, when increasing efficiency at the airport will solve more problems than airport expansion ever will. It defies logic to expand the runway system when the FAA has said in an earlier report that the runway expansion would increase airport capacity 0%, yet the FAA is solidly behind the proposed expansion. Yet another contradiction.
The necessity of any expansion has yet to be demonstrated, but if expansion were proven to be necessary, where is the logic in opting for the alternative that will affect the most citizens, the most endangered habitat, is the most costly in terms of time as well as money, presents the highest risk to the safety ofpeople and equipment, is the most vulnerable to terrorism and unnecessarily enlarges the footprint of the airport?
Gary Boettcher, the president of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations said in addressing safety concerns put to him in regard to the south runway, "We land commercial a/c on runways only 5500 feet long with varying degrees of slope on both ends."
It seems to me then, that the north runway option would be far more viable in that it:
- Would present a runway well longer than that deemed safe by Mr. Boettcher and within the scope of the intended aircraft use.
- Would not require the tremendous amount of fill that, if we must appropriate it, would be far better used in the current Everglades Restoration Project to fill in canals that were dug with absence of forethought.
- Would present a ground level runway.
- Would not increase the present footprint of the airport.
- Would be far less costly because the bridgework over US1 would not be necessary.
- Would affect far fewer people with respect to noise and air pollution.
- Would not affect the ever diminishing, already threatened wetlands and wildlife habitat.
- Would be less stressful to wildlife and people in nearby parks and in neighboring towns and villages.
- Would not present any higher security risks than are already in existence.
- Would be far less costly in terms of time and money.Would not force the dangerous combining of civil and commercial aviation onto one runway which would be caused by the closure of the south runway during several years of construction.
The argument has been presented that land acquisition to move the affected businesses on the north side of the airport would be too costly, but no mention has been made as to the comparison of such acquisition with the cost of relocating hundreds of families or soundproofing their homes affected by the proposed south runway expansion.
I believe that to be a moot point anyway, because I have it on good authority that some forty acres of land on the south side of the airport is available within the existing footprint.
At a time when the necessity to conserve every drop of available water in the south Florida aquifer is paramount, the compaction of the fill required for the runway substrate will consume a minimum of 234,000,000 gallons of water that we just do not have. True, this water will eventually find its' way back into the aquifer, but so will the salts that didn't leach out of the fill in the drying process; so will the water that we are being told that we cannot put on our plants and lawns. Prohibiting lawn watering while wasting water in compaction, mixing 70,000 + yards of concrete and rinsing 7,000 + concrete trucks is another glaring contradiction.
Broward County already ranks in the top 20% of counties in the US, and 4th in Florida in existing air pollution. If this fill that is to be purloined is stockpiled and allowed to drain off site, 300000+ truckloads will have to be transported to the runway site, This alone will dump 3000 tons of toxins, pollutants and greenhouse gasses into our atmosphere, and with the anticipated increase in air traffic, FLL will put an additional 5,000 tons of pollutants into our already hazardous atmosphere each year, and this does not include the emissions from the ancillary construction equipment used in the project.
The lifetime cancer risk from diesel soot in Broward County presently exceeds the risk of all other air toxics tracked by EPA combined. The average lifetime diesel soot cancer risk for a resident of Broward County is 1 in 3,142. This risk is 318 times greater than EPA's acceptable cancer level of 1 in a million, and it affects all of Broward County because of our varying winds that are indiscriminate in where they carry gasses and particulate matter
This airborne pollution will contribute to the ground ozone and will have a disastrous effect on the habitat of numerous wildlife species, including the endangered native mangroves, many marine and terrestrial animals, and avian species.
It will also cause extreme damage to the parks, such as Anne Kolb Nature Center, Brooks Park, and JU Lloyd State Park and the blue-ways, which include the New River Loop, a National Protected Area. The increased air traffic will dump untold amounts of pollution on the waterway system we have fought to preserve, preventing proper oxygenation in an already weakened marine environment.
The destruction of breeding habitats will be irreparable and eternal, affecting the hatching and nursery area of countless fishes and birds. This is not protecting the environment.
I ask you and all citizens of Broward County to join together in opposition to this waste of our precious resources, this destruction of our environment, and this threat to our health and well-being.
Friday, October 5, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
I read an article that mentioned the growing concern among commissioners about oversight of the busy airport (FLL) and the rebuilding of the airports management to ensure there is the depth of leadership that the Commissioners want.
For the Commission to have the depth of leadership required to oversee the management of the airport, the Commission itself needs an oversight board.
The Broward County Commission lacks the knowledge, the expertise, the experience and the collective integrity required to run an airport, yet they want full control of FLL. Sure. The six Commissioners that voted for the expansion at FLL all have ties to the construction management company that oversees all construction at FLL, or to their lobbyists. One is married to one of the lobbyists, and she is the Commissions' liaison to the airport.
As far as I can see, this can only mean the anticipation of financial gain, which is the reason for choosing the most costly alternative. The more money involved, the more opportunities for more people to put some of it in their pockets.
The company hired by the Commission to develop the environmental impact statement has prepared several rough drafts over the past decade that are riddled with inconsistencies and erroneous information, but they work for the Commission, and the impact statements are in many ways influenced by the desires of the Commission.
When six people can commit the citizens of Broward County to a pork barrel project of the magnitude of this airport expansion "lack of plan", it is past time to review the system of government presently in effect.
We are not the sleepy little community we were when the commission system was put into effect, and our growth demands that the government of Broward County catch up to the growth of Broward County, and I personally am in favor of the three-branch system espoused by our national and state constitutions. Failing that, an oversight board should be appointed to prevent mistakes of this nature in the future.
To this end, I sent the following email to our new Governor, Charlie Crist:
The Constitution of Florida declares that "All political power is inherent in the people" With the passing of each election, those to be governed choose those who will lead their government.
The Constitution also provides that the power to govern shall be among three branches of government: the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch: Although Broward County has grown considerably in the past few years, oursystem of government is still from that bygone time when the County was a sleepy little community that only came alive during Spring Break.
Broward County has progressed far beyond the County Commission system, and is sadly in need of a system that governs for the good of the most people.
When six people can override the wishes of the community as a whole, and make choices that adversely affect the lives and dreams of thousands of their constituents, when there are more viable alternatives, I believe that it is time for a change.
The citizens of Broward County can vote only for the candidate from their own district, and have absolutely no say in what happens in the other districts, and that is outrageous. The County Commissioners make decisions that affect all of Broward County, not just their own district, so all of the citizenry should be involved in all of the decisions.
The Broward County Commission has voted for an expansion plan for Fort Lauderdale International Airport that is both ill-timed and ill-planned.
Mayor Josephus Eggelletion was joined by commissioners Stacy Ritter, Ken Keechl, Ilene Lieberman, Kristin Jacobs and Diana Wasserman-Rubin in favoring the plan. Commissioners John Rodstrom, Suzanne Gunzburger and Lois Wexler opposed it.
Commissioner John Rodstrom accused his colleagues of making a hasty and unnecessary decision. He said the commission was relaying on flawed data about travel projections and did not know enough about how much the runway, neighborhood assistance to offset noise and the subsequent need for new gates will cost.
"We come to a decision that is long overdue and one which no one takesl ightly", Mayor Josephus Eggelletion said. However, the Commission seems to have taken it very lightly because, by and large, they ignored the arguments of the concerned citizens and only listened to those who voiced an opinion that was in agreement with their own. At the end, the vote was cast as it was engineered to be before the public even became involved.
The three Commissioners who voted against this "lack of plan" did so for a very good reason, and that is because of a lack of qualified or convincing information, and I feel that an oversight board would have prevented the plan from passing for the very same reason.
In view of the sophomoric decisions reached by the County Commission, I feel that it is past time to review the need for a better form of government for Broward County, and I believe whole-heartedly in the three-branch system espoused by our National and our State Constitutions. Failing this, I believe that at the very least, an oversight board is the next best option.
It is time for the Broward County government to catch up to the growth of Broward County, and the citizens of Broward County need your strong leadership now, more than ever before.
Grant Campbell
Governor Christ's office responded with this rather non-committal email:
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for contacting Governor Charlie Crist. The Governor appreciates your concerns about the current form of Broward County Government and asked me to respond on his behalf.
Governor Crist wants to know how Floridians feel about the many critical issues we face, and appreciates you taking the time to share your concerns and views, as they are important to him. Rest assured he will keep yourcomments in mind when speaking with state and local officials.
Thank you again for contacting the Governor's office. Please continue to bring to the attention of this office those matters of concern or interest to you.
For information about the Governor's initiatives and to subscribe to hisweekly "Notes from the Capitol" newsletter, please visit our Web site athttp://www.flgov.com/.
Sincerely,
Rex T. Newman
Office of Citizen Services
This project is estimated at in excess of $650,000,000.00, and when the cost overruns, and the annual rise in construction costs are factored in, final cost could be well over $1,000,000,000.00.
I feel that decisions of this caliber should be made by the people who will be affected by the decision, not by six people who are in a position to profit by their association with the project they are voting for, and at the very least should be controlled by an oversight board if not through a public referendum.
For the Commission to have the depth of leadership required to oversee the management of the airport, the Commission itself needs an oversight board.
The Broward County Commission lacks the knowledge, the expertise, the experience and the collective integrity required to run an airport, yet they want full control of FLL. Sure. The six Commissioners that voted for the expansion at FLL all have ties to the construction management company that oversees all construction at FLL, or to their lobbyists. One is married to one of the lobbyists, and she is the Commissions' liaison to the airport.
As far as I can see, this can only mean the anticipation of financial gain, which is the reason for choosing the most costly alternative. The more money involved, the more opportunities for more people to put some of it in their pockets.
The company hired by the Commission to develop the environmental impact statement has prepared several rough drafts over the past decade that are riddled with inconsistencies and erroneous information, but they work for the Commission, and the impact statements are in many ways influenced by the desires of the Commission.
When six people can commit the citizens of Broward County to a pork barrel project of the magnitude of this airport expansion "lack of plan", it is past time to review the system of government presently in effect.
We are not the sleepy little community we were when the commission system was put into effect, and our growth demands that the government of Broward County catch up to the growth of Broward County, and I personally am in favor of the three-branch system espoused by our national and state constitutions. Failing that, an oversight board should be appointed to prevent mistakes of this nature in the future.
To this end, I sent the following email to our new Governor, Charlie Crist:
The Constitution of Florida declares that "All political power is inherent in the people" With the passing of each election, those to be governed choose those who will lead their government.
The Constitution also provides that the power to govern shall be among three branches of government: the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch: Although Broward County has grown considerably in the past few years, oursystem of government is still from that bygone time when the County was a sleepy little community that only came alive during Spring Break.
Broward County has progressed far beyond the County Commission system, and is sadly in need of a system that governs for the good of the most people.
When six people can override the wishes of the community as a whole, and make choices that adversely affect the lives and dreams of thousands of their constituents, when there are more viable alternatives, I believe that it is time for a change.
The citizens of Broward County can vote only for the candidate from their own district, and have absolutely no say in what happens in the other districts, and that is outrageous. The County Commissioners make decisions that affect all of Broward County, not just their own district, so all of the citizenry should be involved in all of the decisions.
The Broward County Commission has voted for an expansion plan for Fort Lauderdale International Airport that is both ill-timed and ill-planned.
Mayor Josephus Eggelletion was joined by commissioners Stacy Ritter, Ken Keechl, Ilene Lieberman, Kristin Jacobs and Diana Wasserman-Rubin in favoring the plan. Commissioners John Rodstrom, Suzanne Gunzburger and Lois Wexler opposed it.
Commissioner John Rodstrom accused his colleagues of making a hasty and unnecessary decision. He said the commission was relaying on flawed data about travel projections and did not know enough about how much the runway, neighborhood assistance to offset noise and the subsequent need for new gates will cost.
"We come to a decision that is long overdue and one which no one takesl ightly", Mayor Josephus Eggelletion said. However, the Commission seems to have taken it very lightly because, by and large, they ignored the arguments of the concerned citizens and only listened to those who voiced an opinion that was in agreement with their own. At the end, the vote was cast as it was engineered to be before the public even became involved.
The three Commissioners who voted against this "lack of plan" did so for a very good reason, and that is because of a lack of qualified or convincing information, and I feel that an oversight board would have prevented the plan from passing for the very same reason.
In view of the sophomoric decisions reached by the County Commission, I feel that it is past time to review the need for a better form of government for Broward County, and I believe whole-heartedly in the three-branch system espoused by our National and our State Constitutions. Failing this, I believe that at the very least, an oversight board is the next best option.
It is time for the Broward County government to catch up to the growth of Broward County, and the citizens of Broward County need your strong leadership now, more than ever before.
Grant Campbell
Governor Christ's office responded with this rather non-committal email:
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for contacting Governor Charlie Crist. The Governor appreciates your concerns about the current form of Broward County Government and asked me to respond on his behalf.
Governor Crist wants to know how Floridians feel about the many critical issues we face, and appreciates you taking the time to share your concerns and views, as they are important to him. Rest assured he will keep yourcomments in mind when speaking with state and local officials.
Thank you again for contacting the Governor's office. Please continue to bring to the attention of this office those matters of concern or interest to you.
For information about the Governor's initiatives and to subscribe to hisweekly "Notes from the Capitol" newsletter, please visit our Web site athttp://www.flgov.com/.
Sincerely,
Rex T. Newman
Office of Citizen Services
This project is estimated at in excess of $650,000,000.00, and when the cost overruns, and the annual rise in construction costs are factored in, final cost could be well over $1,000,000,000.00.
I feel that decisions of this caliber should be made by the people who will be affected by the decision, not by six people who are in a position to profit by their association with the project they are voting for, and at the very least should be controlled by an oversight board if not through a public referendum.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
C.A.R.E. Citizens Against Runway Expansion
This is a copy of the e-mail I sent to the FAA's manager of Airport Improvement Program.
"Three species of mangroves are found in Florida: the red mangrove, black mangrove, and white mangrove. Typically, red mangroves grow along the water's edge, black mangroves grow on slightly higher elevations than the red mangrove, and white mangroves grow upland from the red and black. All are threatened species. Mangroves grow in saltwater and in areas frequently flooded by saltwater.'
"Early settlers to South Florida regarded mangrove forests as being useless, mosquito-infested, uninhabitable lands. Today, ecologists realize their important role in coastal ecosystems. Mangrove leaves, trunks and branches fall into the water and are transformed into detritus, which is the basis of an elaborate food chain. Mangroves provide protected habitat, breeding grounds and nursery areas to many terrestrial and marine animals. Mangroves also provide shoreline protection from wind, waves and floods.'
"From 1920 to 1926, the original freshwater ecosystem of this area was dredged, filled and divided for development. As part of a wetlands mitigation program the land was purchased, and between 1985 and 1993, a multi-agency effort re-created 203 acres of mangroves, mudflats and tidal pools."
The runway expansion approved by the Broward County Commission will eradicate approximately 15 acres of wetlands largely populated by mangroves and other threatened species such as the Smooth-billed Ani. According to the Florida Birding Atlas' Smooth-billed Ani distribution map, there are indeed at least 2 confirmed nesting areas in the path of the expansion, and at least 2 more unconfirmed areas at the east end of the flight path, near or in
J ohn U Lloyd State Park.
If no new runway is built, the consultants, hired by the Federal Aviation Administration, "think" delays will top an average of 26 minutes by 2020, more than four times what is considered acceptable. Are we to invest nearly a billion dollars on conjecture?
The longer runway would require the airport to soundproof or buy more homes, affecting the lives of 2,500 residents compared with 1,500 with the 6,001-foot runway.
None of the options discussed to this point are adequate to handle the New Larger Aircraft that the FAA defines as Group VI Aircraft, and which will soon dominate air traffic. These aircraft, as you are aware, require a 200 foot wide by 11,000 foot long runway with a minimum of 600 feet between a runway and a taxi-way, and a minimum of 324 feet between taxi-ways. In five or ten years do we repeat this mistake and spend another billion dollars or more to extend the runway again, only this time build cofferdams and push fill into the ocean to make land for the runway?
As it now stands, the Broward County Commission has approved a plan that will require 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill, but they haven't divulged the source of this fill. At my last observation I haven't noticed any hills that we can take down to contribute this vast amount of fill, even if we utilize the existing land fill piles in Broward, Palm Beach and Dade Counties. Short of digging, the only other option is dredging, which presents another set of problems
I don't believe that they realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill amounts to an area of 3,722 acre feet, which at 25 feet in depth would create a lake with a surface area of .76 square miles. Will this lake be for recreational purposes or will it replace the aquifer that we have nearly ruined by lowering the level of Lake Okeechobee, and allowing fertilizers and phosphates from the farms and sugar plantations to pollute our existing aquifer? Add this to the 15 acres of wetlands that will be lost. Maybe this new lake will take out some more of our endangered wildlife habitat.
In a day when fuel economy is of paramount concern, the Commissioners must realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill means 300,000 truckloads at 20 yards per truck, and if we assume a 20 mile round trip, (which to me is inconceivable in view of the fact that there is no land area large enough to provide this fill within a ten mile radius of the airport,) at 8 miles per gallon, (an optimistic figure), means that a minimum of 750,000 gallons of fuel will be consumed, which at today's rates, $3.00 per gallon, means $2,225,000.00 in fuel costs alone, and who knows what the fuel cost will be in the future?  This doesn't even consider the fuel to operate the ancillary construction equipment that will be involved in the project.
According to an esteemed source, a modern automobile with a catalytic converter emits about 20 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon of fuel used. Diesel burning dump trucks not only are rarely equipped with working catalytic converters, but they also emit sulphur dioxide, and nitrous oxide as well as other noxious elements and VOCs, adding poisons to the ground ozone.
750,000 gallons of fuel at 20 pounds of emissions is 15,000,000 pounds or 7,500 tons minimum, of toxic greenhouse gas emissions. Why not just park an idling Greyhound bus in our living rooms?
The demand for concrete is presently at an all time high, driving the price per yard up at a steadily increasing rate. At today's costs, the nearly 60,000 cubic yards of concrete required for the top 14 inches of the runway alone will be in excess of $2, 850,000.00, and what will the final cost escalate to with an estimated annual rise in material cost of between 2% and 8%? This does not consider the lighting, drainage piping, and reinforcing steel, or miscellaneous iron. Nor does it consider the megalithic structure needed to support the bridge deck over US1 and the FEC railroad tracks.
In order to handle the increased passenger volume carried by the NLAs, the concourses will have to be widened, separated by more space than FLL can afford, double or triple decked, and the fuel pumping system will have to be completely upgraded. Departure delays will pale in insignificance to the delays in baggage check-in and security screening.
There is presently no room at FLL to build a hangar capable of servicing an Airbus A380 when you consider that the clear span inside the building must be a minimum of 260' deep by 280' wide and 90' in height.By the time the roof structure is considered in the height of the building, the overall height will exceed the airport height restrictions (This amounts to a twelve story building.), and extreme precision will be required in placing the aircraft in the hangar. Hangar floors will have to be thickened to support the jacking weight of the NLA's, and in reality, the electronics involved in servicing will require more space in the hangar, , or must be housed in a separate building.
By the time the runway construction is finished, the runway will be outmoded, and we will find ourselves in a similar situation again, needing to expand an airport that will never be able to accommodate the volume of passenger traffic this fantasy envisions.
How, in good conscience, can the Broward County Commission approve an expansion program that creates more problems than it solves; when this affects the habitat of the human species as well as the indigenous flora and fauna mentioned above? Although humans are far from endangered, their south Florida habitat is diminishing rapidly.
We are encroaching on the Everglades, indiscriminately destroying more wetlands daily, and now we want to destroy even more by replacing the homes of homo-sapiens "melaleucus", and by the somewhat magical procurement of 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill.
If the runway is built, the damage to the wetlands will be permanent, and costly in terms of endangered wildlife. The mangroves that will be destroyed are already considered threatened and the destruction of the breeding habitat of endangered marine life and threatened avian species such as the Smooth-billed Ani, whose existing nesting area in the path of the runway expansion, along with its breeding area in John U Lloyd Park, will be eternal and irreparable. Do we learn nothing from our past mistakes?
This rape of our diminishing wetlands is no less reprehensible than the destruction of the Amazon Rain Forest that has everyone here so up in arms. Is it not hypocritical to complain about someone else doing essentially the same things that we plan to do, no matter the scale?
The American Forestry Association is currently in a campaign to plant 3,000,000 trees around the globe in an effort to combat global warming. "Planting trees in the right places for the right reasons is the best dollar-for-dollar investment you can make to improve our environment. We plant to repair hurricane or flood damage - have cleaner air -- reclaim abandoned strip mines or farms - prevent erosion into salmon streams - fight back invasive species of trees - and make cooler, cleaner cities. Trees reduce greenhouse gases by absorbing carbon dioxide, save energy, help filter our water, and so much more"! We, on the other hand, are planning a destruction that will partially offset this effort, and this is counter-productive to say the least.
"We come to a decision that is long overdue and one which no one takes lightly," Mayor Josephus Eggelletion said at the meeting of June 5. As I saw it at the meeting, the County Commission took it very lightly, because they, in large part, ignored the pleas and arguments of the people who expressed negative views of the expansion, while embracing the views of the "Yellow Shirt Brigade".
In actuality, the people who voiced positive opinions were contractors, hoteliers, and other business people who stand to profit from the expansion program itself more than from the supposed influx of new citizens it is meant to draw to Broward County, (no one has yet determined where to house them, or the people in the 40+ mobile home parks, that will have to be placed in alternative affordable housing). In my view, this can only mean that they anticipate some financial gain at the expense of the rest of the citizens of Broward County.
It now rests on the shoulders of the FAA and the EPA to advise the Broward County Commission of their fallacies and poor judgment in approving this expansion "lack of plan". Please say "Stop!" to this nonsense.
The above letter was forwarded from the Washington DC office to Virginia Lane, who is in charge of the Orlando office, and the following is the non-committal response from her.
From:
Virginia.Lane@faa.gov
To:
"Grant Campbell"
Cc:
cbabb@landrum-brown.com
Subject:
Re: FLL Expansion
Date:
Tuesday, August 14, 2007 8:53:16 AM
Dear Mr. Campbell: Thank you for your comments. Your comments will be
considered in the Final EIS that FAA is currently preparing.
Virginia Lane, A.I.C.P.
Federal Aviation Administration
Orlando Airports District Office
5950 Hazeltine National Drive
Orlando, FL 32822
Tel: 407/812/6331 Ext. 129
Fax: 407/812/6978
As you will see in future posts, this expansion is plagued with problems that the Broward County Commission does not possess the intelligence or the expertise to solve, even if you factor in the collective experience of the FAA.
Expansion is not the answer to FLLs problems. A prior docoment from the FAA stated that runway expansion would increase airport capacity 0%. If the tenant airlines at the airport were to iccrease their efficiency, there would be no non weather related delays at FLL.
The aircraft control system is outmoded and needs replacing. This is not my area of expertise, but for more information on this, please visit this site:
http://www.faahope.com/?section=News
Grant Campbell
"Three species of mangroves are found in Florida: the red mangrove, black mangrove, and white mangrove. Typically, red mangroves grow along the water's edge, black mangroves grow on slightly higher elevations than the red mangrove, and white mangroves grow upland from the red and black. All are threatened species. Mangroves grow in saltwater and in areas frequently flooded by saltwater.'
"Early settlers to South Florida regarded mangrove forests as being useless, mosquito-infested, uninhabitable lands. Today, ecologists realize their important role in coastal ecosystems. Mangrove leaves, trunks and branches fall into the water and are transformed into detritus, which is the basis of an elaborate food chain. Mangroves provide protected habitat, breeding grounds and nursery areas to many terrestrial and marine animals. Mangroves also provide shoreline protection from wind, waves and floods.'
"From 1920 to 1926, the original freshwater ecosystem of this area was dredged, filled and divided for development. As part of a wetlands mitigation program the land was purchased, and between 1985 and 1993, a multi-agency effort re-created 203 acres of mangroves, mudflats and tidal pools."
The runway expansion approved by the Broward County Commission will eradicate approximately 15 acres of wetlands largely populated by mangroves and other threatened species such as the Smooth-billed Ani. According to the Florida Birding Atlas' Smooth-billed Ani distribution map, there are indeed at least 2 confirmed nesting areas in the path of the expansion, and at least 2 more unconfirmed areas at the east end of the flight path, near or in
J ohn U Lloyd State Park.
If no new runway is built, the consultants, hired by the Federal Aviation Administration, "think" delays will top an average of 26 minutes by 2020, more than four times what is considered acceptable. Are we to invest nearly a billion dollars on conjecture?
The longer runway would require the airport to soundproof or buy more homes, affecting the lives of 2,500 residents compared with 1,500 with the 6,001-foot runway.
None of the options discussed to this point are adequate to handle the New Larger Aircraft that the FAA defines as Group VI Aircraft, and which will soon dominate air traffic. These aircraft, as you are aware, require a 200 foot wide by 11,000 foot long runway with a minimum of 600 feet between a runway and a taxi-way, and a minimum of 324 feet between taxi-ways. In five or ten years do we repeat this mistake and spend another billion dollars or more to extend the runway again, only this time build cofferdams and push fill into the ocean to make land for the runway?
As it now stands, the Broward County Commission has approved a plan that will require 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill, but they haven't divulged the source of this fill. At my last observation I haven't noticed any hills that we can take down to contribute this vast amount of fill, even if we utilize the existing land fill piles in Broward, Palm Beach and Dade Counties. Short of digging, the only other option is dredging, which presents another set of problems
I don't believe that they realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill amounts to an area of 3,722 acre feet, which at 25 feet in depth would create a lake with a surface area of .76 square miles. Will this lake be for recreational purposes or will it replace the aquifer that we have nearly ruined by lowering the level of Lake Okeechobee, and allowing fertilizers and phosphates from the farms and sugar plantations to pollute our existing aquifer? Add this to the 15 acres of wetlands that will be lost. Maybe this new lake will take out some more of our endangered wildlife habitat.
In a day when fuel economy is of paramount concern, the Commissioners must realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill means 300,000 truckloads at 20 yards per truck, and if we assume a 20 mile round trip, (which to me is inconceivable in view of the fact that there is no land area large enough to provide this fill within a ten mile radius of the airport,) at 8 miles per gallon, (an optimistic figure), means that a minimum of 750,000 gallons of fuel will be consumed, which at today's rates, $3.00 per gallon, means $2,225,000.00 in fuel costs alone, and who knows what the fuel cost will be in the future?  This doesn't even consider the fuel to operate the ancillary construction equipment that will be involved in the project.
According to an esteemed source, a modern automobile with a catalytic converter emits about 20 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon of fuel used. Diesel burning dump trucks not only are rarely equipped with working catalytic converters, but they also emit sulphur dioxide, and nitrous oxide as well as other noxious elements and VOCs, adding poisons to the ground ozone.
750,000 gallons of fuel at 20 pounds of emissions is 15,000,000 pounds or 7,500 tons minimum, of toxic greenhouse gas emissions. Why not just park an idling Greyhound bus in our living rooms?
The demand for concrete is presently at an all time high, driving the price per yard up at a steadily increasing rate. At today's costs, the nearly 60,000 cubic yards of concrete required for the top 14 inches of the runway alone will be in excess of $2, 850,000.00, and what will the final cost escalate to with an estimated annual rise in material cost of between 2% and 8%? This does not consider the lighting, drainage piping, and reinforcing steel, or miscellaneous iron. Nor does it consider the megalithic structure needed to support the bridge deck over US1 and the FEC railroad tracks.
In order to handle the increased passenger volume carried by the NLAs, the concourses will have to be widened, separated by more space than FLL can afford, double or triple decked, and the fuel pumping system will have to be completely upgraded. Departure delays will pale in insignificance to the delays in baggage check-in and security screening.
There is presently no room at FLL to build a hangar capable of servicing an Airbus A380 when you consider that the clear span inside the building must be a minimum of 260' deep by 280' wide and 90' in height.By the time the roof structure is considered in the height of the building, the overall height will exceed the airport height restrictions (This amounts to a twelve story building.), and extreme precision will be required in placing the aircraft in the hangar. Hangar floors will have to be thickened to support the jacking weight of the NLA's, and in reality, the electronics involved in servicing will require more space in the hangar, , or must be housed in a separate building.
By the time the runway construction is finished, the runway will be outmoded, and we will find ourselves in a similar situation again, needing to expand an airport that will never be able to accommodate the volume of passenger traffic this fantasy envisions.
How, in good conscience, can the Broward County Commission approve an expansion program that creates more problems than it solves; when this affects the habitat of the human species as well as the indigenous flora and fauna mentioned above? Although humans are far from endangered, their south Florida habitat is diminishing rapidly.
We are encroaching on the Everglades, indiscriminately destroying more wetlands daily, and now we want to destroy even more by replacing the homes of homo-sapiens "melaleucus", and by the somewhat magical procurement of 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill.
If the runway is built, the damage to the wetlands will be permanent, and costly in terms of endangered wildlife. The mangroves that will be destroyed are already considered threatened and the destruction of the breeding habitat of endangered marine life and threatened avian species such as the Smooth-billed Ani, whose existing nesting area in the path of the runway expansion, along with its breeding area in John U Lloyd Park, will be eternal and irreparable. Do we learn nothing from our past mistakes?
This rape of our diminishing wetlands is no less reprehensible than the destruction of the Amazon Rain Forest that has everyone here so up in arms. Is it not hypocritical to complain about someone else doing essentially the same things that we plan to do, no matter the scale?
The American Forestry Association is currently in a campaign to plant 3,000,000 trees around the globe in an effort to combat global warming. "Planting trees in the right places for the right reasons is the best dollar-for-dollar investment you can make to improve our environment. We plant to repair hurricane or flood damage - have cleaner air -- reclaim abandoned strip mines or farms - prevent erosion into salmon streams - fight back invasive species of trees - and make cooler, cleaner cities. Trees reduce greenhouse gases by absorbing carbon dioxide, save energy, help filter our water, and so much more"! We, on the other hand, are planning a destruction that will partially offset this effort, and this is counter-productive to say the least.
"We come to a decision that is long overdue and one which no one takes lightly," Mayor Josephus Eggelletion said at the meeting of June 5. As I saw it at the meeting, the County Commission took it very lightly, because they, in large part, ignored the pleas and arguments of the people who expressed negative views of the expansion, while embracing the views of the "Yellow Shirt Brigade".
In actuality, the people who voiced positive opinions were contractors, hoteliers, and other business people who stand to profit from the expansion program itself more than from the supposed influx of new citizens it is meant to draw to Broward County, (no one has yet determined where to house them, or the people in the 40+ mobile home parks, that will have to be placed in alternative affordable housing). In my view, this can only mean that they anticipate some financial gain at the expense of the rest of the citizens of Broward County.
It now rests on the shoulders of the FAA and the EPA to advise the Broward County Commission of their fallacies and poor judgment in approving this expansion "lack of plan". Please say "Stop!" to this nonsense.
The above letter was forwarded from the Washington DC office to Virginia Lane, who is in charge of the Orlando office, and the following is the non-committal response from her.
From:
Virginia.Lane@faa.gov
To:
"Grant Campbell"
Cc:
cbabb@landrum-brown.com
Subject:
Re: FLL Expansion
Date:
Tuesday, August 14, 2007 8:53:16 AM
Dear Mr. Campbell: Thank you for your comments. Your comments will be
considered in the Final EIS that FAA is currently preparing.
Virginia Lane, A.I.C.P.
Federal Aviation Administration
Orlando Airports District Office
5950 Hazeltine National Drive
Orlando, FL 32822
Tel: 407/812/6331 Ext. 129
Fax: 407/812/6978
As you will see in future posts, this expansion is plagued with problems that the Broward County Commission does not possess the intelligence or the expertise to solve, even if you factor in the collective experience of the FAA.
Expansion is not the answer to FLLs problems. A prior docoment from the FAA stated that runway expansion would increase airport capacity 0%. If the tenant airlines at the airport were to iccrease their efficiency, there would be no non weather related delays at FLL.
The aircraft control system is outmoded and needs replacing. This is not my area of expertise, but for more information on this, please visit this site:
http://www.faahope.com/?section=News
Grant Campbell
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
C.A.R.E
Citizens Against Runway Expansion
On Jun 21, 2007, I wrote this to Gary Boetcher, who is the president of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, voicing my concern for the safety of passengers, crews and ground personnel, because the proposed runway will be elevated at both ends.
On the west end, the runway will be elevated to clear the interstate highway that borders the airport. Between the end of the runway and the interstate, there is a 100' wide canal. and in my opinion, this elevation provides a perfech launching ramp to put an airplane either in the canal or onto the highway if the airplane should overshoot the runway.
At the opposite end, the runway will be elevated 46', making landing from the east a downgrade situation which will require more power to bring the aircraft to a safe stop.
----- Original Message -----
From: Grant Campbell
To: Gary Boettcher
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: FLL expansion
On June 5, 2007, The Broward County Commission voted to extend runway 9R 27L at Fort Lauderdale International Airport. This expansion has been said to be unsafe by at least two commercial airline pilots because of the amount of slope required to span the FEC Railroad tracks and US1 at the eastern portion of the runway, and because of the elevation required at the west end of the runway to provide vertical clearance for Interstate 95.
A sloped runway in itself seems difficult to negotiate safely, but when it is elevated at both ends, is only 8000 feet long and only 150 feet wide, it seems to this outsider, to be a tragic event waiting to happen.
The proposed alternative north runway expansion would have been the safer option because it would be at a ground level elevation. None of the options available to FLL will accommodate the NLA, or group VI aircraft that will soon dominate air traffic, which to me, makes any expansion absolutely fruitless, when one considers that FLL will never be able to handle the envisioned air traffic.
I am asking the CAPA to rally against this costly and absolutely useless expansion, and please advise the FAA that the 9R 27L expansion represents indeterminate safety concerns.
Thank you in advance for your consideration,
Grant Campbell
Mr. Boetcher responded:
Grant,
Thank you for writing with your concern. The FAA performance criteria for each of the three climb segments must be met in order for an a/c to land on a respective runway. Simply put, not all a/c may be able to land and/or takeoff on the proposed runway as each aircraft have different performance characteristics.
We land commercial a/c on runways only 5500 feet long with varying degrees of slope on both ends. What may be unsafe for a particular a/c could be perfectly safe for another.
Unless I see some numbers I cannot either oppose or affirm the FLL plans based on your assertions. Is this really a noise complaint issue?
Best regards,
Gary Boettcher
CAPA President
My response was:
No Sir, it is far from a noise issue. See what 2 airline pilots had to sat at the meeting prior to the ratification of the expansion.
MY NAME IS MIKE MCKEEVER.
I'M A 19 - YEAR CAPTAIN WITH A MAJOR COMMERCIAL AIRLINE. I'VE FLOWN THE 727, THE MD 80, THE FOLKER 100, THE BEING 737,757, AND THE BEING 768 & BEFORE THAT, I WAS IN THE AIR FORCE FLYING JET AIRCRAFT AND HELICOPTERS. I'VE NEVER ENCOUNTERED A RUNWAY DESIGN SUCH AS THE DESIGN OF THE SOUTH PROPOSED RUNWAY. WHEN I DISCOVERED IT WAS GOING TO BE ELEVATED ON THE WEST END, I WAS SURPRISED. I WAS IN CREDULOUS.
I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THE PILOTS I FLY WITH. WHEN THEY REALIZE THAT'S THE DESIGN, THEY ALSO ARE AMAZED
THIS IS A POTENTIAL CATASTROPHE WAITING TO HAPPEN. THE CONSULTANTS WITH THE EIS SAID THAT OTHER RUNWAYS DO THE SAME SORT OF THING. I CAN'T THINK OF ONE MAJOR COMMERCIAL AIRPORT RUNWAY IN THE U.S. THAT DOES THAT.
THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE ROADWAYS THAT GO UNDER A RUNWAY, BUT THE RUNWAY ITSELF IS PREDOMINANTLY AT AIRPORT ELEVATION. THE ROADWAY IS WHAT IS NOT AT AIRPORT ELEVATION.
COMING IN FROM THE WEST, THIS WILL BE LIKE LANDING ON AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER. FRANKLY, I KNOW SEVERAL GUYS WHO HAVE ALREADY SAID THEY WOULD NOT USE THIS RUNWAY. I WOULD NOT USE THIS RUNWAY. I WOULD LOVE TO GO INTO MUCH MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE COST ASPECTS, ABOUT THE OPTIONS.
I THINK THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY EXPANSION. I THINK THIS IS A WASTE OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY, BUT IT IS A COMPLETELY FLAWED DESIGN. IF YOU VOTE FOR THIS, YOU WILL BE VOTING FOR THE ALBATROSS OF AIRPORT RUNWAYS. THIS IS THE EDSEL OF THE AIRPORT DESIGN WORLD.
MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER JOHNSTON. I RESIDE AT 745 NORTHWEST 12TH AVENUE IN DANIA BEACH. I AM CURRENTLY A BOEING TRIPLE 7 CAPTAIN FLYING INTERNATIONAL FOR ONE OF THE LARGEST AIR CARRIERS OUT OF FORT LAUDERDALE.
I HAVE FLOWN CONTINUOUSLY FOR THIS AIRLINE SINCE 1978. BEFORE MY PRESENT JOB, I FLEW FOR THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE FOR SEVEN YEARS AND PRIOR TO THAT CIVILIAN PILOT FOR FOUR YEARS. THIS AMOUNT TO NEARLY 40 YEARS AND OVER 15,000 HOURS OF FLIGHT EXPERIENCE.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I OPPOSE THE B1 C RUNWAY DESIGN DUE TO SERIOUS SAFETY CONCERNS. THE ALTERNATIVE B1 C8,000 FEET RUNWAY WITH ITS .6 PERCENT UPHILL GRADIENT TO THE EAST IS UNSUITABLE FOR ALL AIRCRAFT 300,000 POUNDS GROSS TAKEOFF WEIGHT. THIS INCLUDES WIDE BODY AIRCRAFT LIKE THE BEING 767 AND AIR BUS. WITH HEAVY RAIN AND STRONG CROSSWIND, THIS RUNWAY WOULD BE DANGEROUS FOR ANY AIRCRAFT.
HERE AT FORT LAUDERDALE, THE PREFERRED NOISE ABATEMENT DEPARTURE DIRECTION IS TO THE EAST OVER PORT EVERGLADES, AND UNFORTUNATELY ALSO JOHN U. LLOYD STATE PARK.
IF THE SPONSORS B1 C DESIGN IS IMPLEMENTED THIS WOULD REQUIRE FOR DEPARTURE AN UPHILL TAKEOFF. CONVERSELY, THE PREFERRED NOISE ABATEMENT DIRECTION FOR LANDING IS TO THE WEST WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A DOWNHILL LANDING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS IS EXACTLY OPPOSITE WHAT MOST ALL PILOTS FLYING OUR AIRCRAFT WOULD ELECT TO DO IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY OF THEIR PASSENGERS AND CREW, AND THAT INCLUDES THE COMMISSIONERS. I PERSONALLY WOULD REFUSE TAKING OFF UPHILL OR LANDING DOWNHILL UNLESS MY AIRCRAFT'S WEIGHT WERE EXTREMELY LIGHT AND THEN ONLY ON A DRY RUNWAY WITH NO TAIL WIND COMPONENT. IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THERE ARE OTHER AIRPORTS IN THE NATION THAT HAVE SLOPED RUNWAY. SHOW ME A RUNWAY IN THE UNITED STATES WITH A 6 PERCENT OR GREATER GRADIENT THAT IS SERVED BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN A REGIONAL JET.
Based on these two statements alone, I would vote against this alternative, but there are other negative considerations as well, not the leasr of which is cost. Unfortunately, that is the driving factor behind the decision to opt for the B1 alternative.It is the most costly. Greed cannot be satisfied with a less expensive alternative, and the more money involved in a project, the more pockets that cn be lined.
Please feel free to respond to this post, or if you would like to join C.A.R.E. please email me at grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com and say you are opposed to this flawed expansion plan at FLL.
I will not use your email address for any reason, but I will add your electonic signature to a petition to stop this nonsense. Together, we can make an impact!
Citizens Against Runway Expansion
On Jun 21, 2007, I wrote this to Gary Boetcher, who is the president of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, voicing my concern for the safety of passengers, crews and ground personnel, because the proposed runway will be elevated at both ends.
On the west end, the runway will be elevated to clear the interstate highway that borders the airport. Between the end of the runway and the interstate, there is a 100' wide canal. and in my opinion, this elevation provides a perfech launching ramp to put an airplane either in the canal or onto the highway if the airplane should overshoot the runway.
At the opposite end, the runway will be elevated 46', making landing from the east a downgrade situation which will require more power to bring the aircraft to a safe stop.
----- Original Message -----
From: Grant Campbell
To: Gary Boettcher
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: FLL expansion
On June 5, 2007, The Broward County Commission voted to extend runway 9R 27L at Fort Lauderdale International Airport. This expansion has been said to be unsafe by at least two commercial airline pilots because of the amount of slope required to span the FEC Railroad tracks and US1 at the eastern portion of the runway, and because of the elevation required at the west end of the runway to provide vertical clearance for Interstate 95.
A sloped runway in itself seems difficult to negotiate safely, but when it is elevated at both ends, is only 8000 feet long and only 150 feet wide, it seems to this outsider, to be a tragic event waiting to happen.
The proposed alternative north runway expansion would have been the safer option because it would be at a ground level elevation. None of the options available to FLL will accommodate the NLA, or group VI aircraft that will soon dominate air traffic, which to me, makes any expansion absolutely fruitless, when one considers that FLL will never be able to handle the envisioned air traffic.
I am asking the CAPA to rally against this costly and absolutely useless expansion, and please advise the FAA that the 9R 27L expansion represents indeterminate safety concerns.
Thank you in advance for your consideration,
Grant Campbell
Mr. Boetcher responded:
Grant,
Thank you for writing with your concern. The FAA performance criteria for each of the three climb segments must be met in order for an a/c to land on a respective runway. Simply put, not all a/c may be able to land and/or takeoff on the proposed runway as each aircraft have different performance characteristics.
We land commercial a/c on runways only 5500 feet long with varying degrees of slope on both ends. What may be unsafe for a particular a/c could be perfectly safe for another.
Unless I see some numbers I cannot either oppose or affirm the FLL plans based on your assertions. Is this really a noise complaint issue?
Best regards,
Gary Boettcher
CAPA President
My response was:
No Sir, it is far from a noise issue. See what 2 airline pilots had to sat at the meeting prior to the ratification of the expansion.
MY NAME IS MIKE MCKEEVER.
I'M A 19 - YEAR CAPTAIN WITH A MAJOR COMMERCIAL AIRLINE. I'VE FLOWN THE 727, THE MD 80, THE FOLKER 100, THE BEING 737,757, AND THE BEING 768 & BEFORE THAT, I WAS IN THE AIR FORCE FLYING JET AIRCRAFT AND HELICOPTERS. I'VE NEVER ENCOUNTERED A RUNWAY DESIGN SUCH AS THE DESIGN OF THE SOUTH PROPOSED RUNWAY. WHEN I DISCOVERED IT WAS GOING TO BE ELEVATED ON THE WEST END, I WAS SURPRISED. I WAS IN CREDULOUS.
I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THE PILOTS I FLY WITH. WHEN THEY REALIZE THAT'S THE DESIGN, THEY ALSO ARE AMAZED
THIS IS A POTENTIAL CATASTROPHE WAITING TO HAPPEN. THE CONSULTANTS WITH THE EIS SAID THAT OTHER RUNWAYS DO THE SAME SORT OF THING. I CAN'T THINK OF ONE MAJOR COMMERCIAL AIRPORT RUNWAY IN THE U.S. THAT DOES THAT.
THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE ROADWAYS THAT GO UNDER A RUNWAY, BUT THE RUNWAY ITSELF IS PREDOMINANTLY AT AIRPORT ELEVATION. THE ROADWAY IS WHAT IS NOT AT AIRPORT ELEVATION.
COMING IN FROM THE WEST, THIS WILL BE LIKE LANDING ON AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER. FRANKLY, I KNOW SEVERAL GUYS WHO HAVE ALREADY SAID THEY WOULD NOT USE THIS RUNWAY. I WOULD NOT USE THIS RUNWAY. I WOULD LOVE TO GO INTO MUCH MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE COST ASPECTS, ABOUT THE OPTIONS.
I THINK THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY EXPANSION. I THINK THIS IS A WASTE OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY, BUT IT IS A COMPLETELY FLAWED DESIGN. IF YOU VOTE FOR THIS, YOU WILL BE VOTING FOR THE ALBATROSS OF AIRPORT RUNWAYS. THIS IS THE EDSEL OF THE AIRPORT DESIGN WORLD.
MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER JOHNSTON. I RESIDE AT 745 NORTHWEST 12TH AVENUE IN DANIA BEACH. I AM CURRENTLY A BOEING TRIPLE 7 CAPTAIN FLYING INTERNATIONAL FOR ONE OF THE LARGEST AIR CARRIERS OUT OF FORT LAUDERDALE.
I HAVE FLOWN CONTINUOUSLY FOR THIS AIRLINE SINCE 1978. BEFORE MY PRESENT JOB, I FLEW FOR THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE FOR SEVEN YEARS AND PRIOR TO THAT CIVILIAN PILOT FOR FOUR YEARS. THIS AMOUNT TO NEARLY 40 YEARS AND OVER 15,000 HOURS OF FLIGHT EXPERIENCE.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I OPPOSE THE B1 C RUNWAY DESIGN DUE TO SERIOUS SAFETY CONCERNS. THE ALTERNATIVE B1 C8,000 FEET RUNWAY WITH ITS .6 PERCENT UPHILL GRADIENT TO THE EAST IS UNSUITABLE FOR ALL AIRCRAFT 300,000 POUNDS GROSS TAKEOFF WEIGHT. THIS INCLUDES WIDE BODY AIRCRAFT LIKE THE BEING 767 AND AIR BUS. WITH HEAVY RAIN AND STRONG CROSSWIND, THIS RUNWAY WOULD BE DANGEROUS FOR ANY AIRCRAFT.
HERE AT FORT LAUDERDALE, THE PREFERRED NOISE ABATEMENT DEPARTURE DIRECTION IS TO THE EAST OVER PORT EVERGLADES, AND UNFORTUNATELY ALSO JOHN U. LLOYD STATE PARK.
IF THE SPONSORS B1 C DESIGN IS IMPLEMENTED THIS WOULD REQUIRE FOR DEPARTURE AN UPHILL TAKEOFF. CONVERSELY, THE PREFERRED NOISE ABATEMENT DIRECTION FOR LANDING IS TO THE WEST WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A DOWNHILL LANDING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS IS EXACTLY OPPOSITE WHAT MOST ALL PILOTS FLYING OUR AIRCRAFT WOULD ELECT TO DO IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY OF THEIR PASSENGERS AND CREW, AND THAT INCLUDES THE COMMISSIONERS. I PERSONALLY WOULD REFUSE TAKING OFF UPHILL OR LANDING DOWNHILL UNLESS MY AIRCRAFT'S WEIGHT WERE EXTREMELY LIGHT AND THEN ONLY ON A DRY RUNWAY WITH NO TAIL WIND COMPONENT. IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THERE ARE OTHER AIRPORTS IN THE NATION THAT HAVE SLOPED RUNWAY. SHOW ME A RUNWAY IN THE UNITED STATES WITH A 6 PERCENT OR GREATER GRADIENT THAT IS SERVED BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN A REGIONAL JET.
Based on these two statements alone, I would vote against this alternative, but there are other negative considerations as well, not the leasr of which is cost. Unfortunately, that is the driving factor behind the decision to opt for the B1 alternative.It is the most costly. Greed cannot be satisfied with a less expensive alternative, and the more money involved in a project, the more pockets that cn be lined.
Please feel free to respond to this post, or if you would like to join C.A.R.E. please email me at grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com and say you are opposed to this flawed expansion plan at FLL.
I will not use your email address for any reason, but I will add your electonic signature to a petition to stop this nonsense. Together, we can make an impact!
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Citizens Against Runway Expansion
On June 5, 2007, the County Commission of Broward County, Florida voted 6-3 to extend the south runway at Hollywood-Fort Lauderdale International Airport (FLL), and in so doing, over-rode the wishes and arguments of the concerned citizens that thought there were more viable alternatives.
If one were to review the tapes of that meeting, they would soon realize that very few of the Commissioners were listening to the speakers who were voicing a negative opinion on the proposed runway expansion. In general, they had their own private discussions among themselves all the while the meeting was in session.
One can only guess what these discussions involved, but it certainly wasn't the topic at hand. Maybe the latest shopping experience, the day's over-the-fence gossip, or the last trip to the hairdresser.
There was, evidently, no real reason to listen to the comments of the concerned citizens, because the vote was decided, although not expressed, before the meeting began. What other explanation can there be for bussing in people from an outlying community to counter the negative arguments of the people who will be directly affected by the expansion.
Stacy Ritter, one of the County Commissioners, along couple of the business people that stand to make enormous profits from the project, brought their "Yellow Shirt Brigade" from Tamarac, a city whose only involvement in the runway expansion program will be to help pay for it when the taxpayers of Broward County receive their bill for the final costs.
I personally fail to see the logic in opting for the least viable alternative in an expansion that has yet to be proven necessary, especially when one considers that it is the most costly, affects the most citizenry, has the most devastating environmental impact, and amounts to the most profligate pork barrel project in recent history, particularly in Broward County.
Some of the points that haven't received proper consideration:
This runway is to be elevated 9 feet at its' west end to provide extra vertical clearance for Interstate 95, which borders the Airport on the west side, and 46 feet at its' east end to provide vertical height to allow a bridge to be built over US Highway 1 and the FEC Railroad tracks that border the airport on the east side, a situation the safety of which is dubious.
The 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill required for the runway substrate approximately equals a 3.6 mile section of the Great Wall of China. Is this to be known as the Geat Wall of Broward?
6,000,000 cubic yards of fill approximately equals 3772 acre feet, which is an area of 151 acres if the area is dug to a depth of 25 feet. This translates to an area about .25 miles square. Less depth requires more surface area. There are no hills in south Florida to knock down for this fill, so digging or dredging are the only options.
To compact the fill sufficiently to support the runway, a minimum of 234,000,000 gallons of water will be consumed, at a time when South Florida is in the worst water crisis in recorded history. The citizens of Broward are on water restrictions and can only water our lawns once per week.
Since there is no land area of this consequence within reasonable trucking distance of the airport, and since this area represents slightly less than half of the area of the city of Tamarac, I wonder if "The Yellow Shirt Brigade", or perhaps a few of the County Commissioners would be willing to sacrifice their homes to provide the area for this new lake.
In a day when fuel economy is of paramount concern, the Commissioners must realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill means 300,000 truckloads at 20 yards per truck, and if we assume a 20 mile round trip, (which to me is inconceivable in view of the fact that there is no land area large enough to provide this fill within a ten mile radius of the airport,) at 8 miles per gallon, an optimistic figure, means that a minimum of 750,000 gallons of fuel will be consumed, which at today's rates, $3.00 per gallon, means $2,225,000.00 in fuel costs alone, and who knows what the fuel cost will be in the future? This doesn't even consider the fuel to operate the ancillary construction equipment that will be involved in the project.
According to an esteemed source, a modern automobile with a catalytic converter emits about 20 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon of fuel used. Diesel burning dump trucks not only are rarely equipped with working catalytic converters, but they also emit sulphur dioxide as well as other noxious elements and VOCs, adding poisons to the ground ozone.
750,000 gallons of fuel at 20 pounds of emissions is 15,000,000 pounds or 7,500 tons minimum, of toxic greenhouse gas emissions. Why not just park an idling Greyhound bus in our living rooms?
A runway 150 feet wide and 8,000 feet long is seriously inadequate to accommodate an Airbus 380, the aircraft of the future. They require a runway 200 feet wide and 11,000 feet long with a minimum of 600 feet between a runway and a taxi-way, and a minimum of 324 feet between taxi-ways. What do we do next? Expand the runway again when the New Larger Aircraft dominate the air traffic, only the next time, we will have to push fill into the ocean to extend the runway and taxi-ways. Why not just build causeways to the Caribbean Islands and to Europe, and eliminate air traffic altogether?
The demand for concrete is presently at an all time high, driving the price per yard up at a steadily increasing rate. At today's costs, the nearly 60,000 cubic yards of concrete required for the top 14 inches of the runway alone will be in excess of $2, 850,000.00, and what will the final cost escalate to with an estimated annual rise in material cost of between 2% and 8%?
The supply of limestone that was thought to be inexhaustible in Dade County is running out rapidly, and soon we will have to import limestone for structural fill , cement and construction aggregate.
The need for any runway expansion has not been proven necessary, and one report from the FAA states that runway expansion will improve capacity 0%. How can anyone with a conscience vote for this expansion plan, when other options are far more viable.If it is because of the opportunities for personal gain,then shame on you.
I ask the Broward County Commissioners, "Where is your conscience, and how well do you sleep at night"? I say to the citizenry of Broward County. "Remember in November"!
Grant Campbell
2321 SW 44 St
Dania Beach, Fl 33312
954-812-2613
grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com
If one were to review the tapes of that meeting, they would soon realize that very few of the Commissioners were listening to the speakers who were voicing a negative opinion on the proposed runway expansion. In general, they had their own private discussions among themselves all the while the meeting was in session.
One can only guess what these discussions involved, but it certainly wasn't the topic at hand. Maybe the latest shopping experience, the day's over-the-fence gossip, or the last trip to the hairdresser.
There was, evidently, no real reason to listen to the comments of the concerned citizens, because the vote was decided, although not expressed, before the meeting began. What other explanation can there be for bussing in people from an outlying community to counter the negative arguments of the people who will be directly affected by the expansion.
Stacy Ritter, one of the County Commissioners, along couple of the business people that stand to make enormous profits from the project, brought their "Yellow Shirt Brigade" from Tamarac, a city whose only involvement in the runway expansion program will be to help pay for it when the taxpayers of Broward County receive their bill for the final costs.
I personally fail to see the logic in opting for the least viable alternative in an expansion that has yet to be proven necessary, especially when one considers that it is the most costly, affects the most citizenry, has the most devastating environmental impact, and amounts to the most profligate pork barrel project in recent history, particularly in Broward County.
Some of the points that haven't received proper consideration:
This runway is to be elevated 9 feet at its' west end to provide extra vertical clearance for Interstate 95, which borders the Airport on the west side, and 46 feet at its' east end to provide vertical height to allow a bridge to be built over US Highway 1 and the FEC Railroad tracks that border the airport on the east side, a situation the safety of which is dubious.
The 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill required for the runway substrate approximately equals a 3.6 mile section of the Great Wall of China. Is this to be known as the Geat Wall of Broward?
6,000,000 cubic yards of fill approximately equals 3772 acre feet, which is an area of 151 acres if the area is dug to a depth of 25 feet. This translates to an area about .25 miles square. Less depth requires more surface area. There are no hills in south Florida to knock down for this fill, so digging or dredging are the only options.
To compact the fill sufficiently to support the runway, a minimum of 234,000,000 gallons of water will be consumed, at a time when South Florida is in the worst water crisis in recorded history. The citizens of Broward are on water restrictions and can only water our lawns once per week.
Since there is no land area of this consequence within reasonable trucking distance of the airport, and since this area represents slightly less than half of the area of the city of Tamarac, I wonder if "The Yellow Shirt Brigade", or perhaps a few of the County Commissioners would be willing to sacrifice their homes to provide the area for this new lake.
In a day when fuel economy is of paramount concern, the Commissioners must realize that 6,000,000 cubic yards of fill means 300,000 truckloads at 20 yards per truck, and if we assume a 20 mile round trip, (which to me is inconceivable in view of the fact that there is no land area large enough to provide this fill within a ten mile radius of the airport,) at 8 miles per gallon, an optimistic figure, means that a minimum of 750,000 gallons of fuel will be consumed, which at today's rates, $3.00 per gallon, means $2,225,000.00 in fuel costs alone, and who knows what the fuel cost will be in the future? This doesn't even consider the fuel to operate the ancillary construction equipment that will be involved in the project.
According to an esteemed source, a modern automobile with a catalytic converter emits about 20 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon of fuel used. Diesel burning dump trucks not only are rarely equipped with working catalytic converters, but they also emit sulphur dioxide as well as other noxious elements and VOCs, adding poisons to the ground ozone.
750,000 gallons of fuel at 20 pounds of emissions is 15,000,000 pounds or 7,500 tons minimum, of toxic greenhouse gas emissions. Why not just park an idling Greyhound bus in our living rooms?
A runway 150 feet wide and 8,000 feet long is seriously inadequate to accommodate an Airbus 380, the aircraft of the future. They require a runway 200 feet wide and 11,000 feet long with a minimum of 600 feet between a runway and a taxi-way, and a minimum of 324 feet between taxi-ways. What do we do next? Expand the runway again when the New Larger Aircraft dominate the air traffic, only the next time, we will have to push fill into the ocean to extend the runway and taxi-ways. Why not just build causeways to the Caribbean Islands and to Europe, and eliminate air traffic altogether?
The demand for concrete is presently at an all time high, driving the price per yard up at a steadily increasing rate. At today's costs, the nearly 60,000 cubic yards of concrete required for the top 14 inches of the runway alone will be in excess of $2, 850,000.00, and what will the final cost escalate to with an estimated annual rise in material cost of between 2% and 8%?
The supply of limestone that was thought to be inexhaustible in Dade County is running out rapidly, and soon we will have to import limestone for structural fill , cement and construction aggregate.
The need for any runway expansion has not been proven necessary, and one report from the FAA states that runway expansion will improve capacity 0%. How can anyone with a conscience vote for this expansion plan, when other options are far more viable.If it is because of the opportunities for personal gain,then shame on you.
I ask the Broward County Commissioners, "Where is your conscience, and how well do you sleep at night"? I say to the citizenry of Broward County. "Remember in November"!
Grant Campbell
2321 SW 44 St
Dania Beach, Fl 33312
954-812-2613
grantcampbell_1@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)