CR 100E Article
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
I am a huge proponent of newspapers and I look forward to reading the Times-Union. But, I was disappointed in Jennifer Peryam's article on the closure of CR 100E. Notwithstanding the multiple critical questions presented to the Aviation Board with no meaningful response, Ms. Peryam's article came across as a one-sided promotional piece favoring the Aviation Board's position. As someone who attended the entire meeting along with many concerned residents, the overwhelming question was why the Aviation Board even considered a runway expansion necessary at this point. The Aviation Board received numerous questions by pilots, business owners and area residents who will be directly affected by the closure of CR 100E, which revealed the following:
No safety studies or traffic counts with regards to how the closure of CR 100E would impact the alternate county roads required to support the significant volume of diverted traffic (including principally CR 175E) have been completed. While the airport manager characterizes the traffic diversion as an "inconvenience" to minimize the impact on the public, I pointed out that safety is a significant concern. Indeed, Mayor Wiggins admitted that no safety studies or traffic counts had been done up to this point and there was a general acknowledgement during the meeting by Councilman Thallemer that CR 175E would not be a safe bypass to accommodate the expected heavy volume of diverted traffic. This should have already been evaluated as part of any proper planning.
A Martin's Supermarket executive said they would have considered other locations in Warsaw if they had known CR 100E would be closed.
While the Aviation Board has relied upon purported concerns as to diverted flights due to runway contamination in inclement weather (i.e., snow/ice/water), it was unable to identify any flights actually diverted because of any such runway contamination. On this point, an experienced pilot with a major orthopedic company pointed out that the Warsaw airport did a great job keeping the runway decontaminated and flight diversion has not been an issue. He also pointed out that with new technology, planes do not need the longer runway to take off.
Rather than a legitimate need for a runway expansion, the driving force behind the current expansion efforts ultimately appears to be the availability of stimulus/FAA (our federal tax) dollars which may not be available at some point in the future. What is wrong with this logic? The Aviation Board has attempted to move forward with a runway expansion project 1) without clear confirmation of the actual need; 2) without conducting any economic impact, traffic or other studies relative to the public's interest; and 3) without properly and timely communicating and coordinating with others who would be clearly impacted by the closure of CR 100E, including the Warsaw Community Schools concerning bus transportation plans, local residents and the county commissioners concerning the ability of other county roads to safely handle the heavy volume of diverted traffic. I support progress but progress and bad planning do not go hand in hand.
Sariah Morgan
Warsaw, via e-mail[[In-content Ad]]
Latest News
E-Editions
I am a huge proponent of newspapers and I look forward to reading the Times-Union. But, I was disappointed in Jennifer Peryam's article on the closure of CR 100E. Notwithstanding the multiple critical questions presented to the Aviation Board with no meaningful response, Ms. Peryam's article came across as a one-sided promotional piece favoring the Aviation Board's position. As someone who attended the entire meeting along with many concerned residents, the overwhelming question was why the Aviation Board even considered a runway expansion necessary at this point. The Aviation Board received numerous questions by pilots, business owners and area residents who will be directly affected by the closure of CR 100E, which revealed the following:
No safety studies or traffic counts with regards to how the closure of CR 100E would impact the alternate county roads required to support the significant volume of diverted traffic (including principally CR 175E) have been completed. While the airport manager characterizes the traffic diversion as an "inconvenience" to minimize the impact on the public, I pointed out that safety is a significant concern. Indeed, Mayor Wiggins admitted that no safety studies or traffic counts had been done up to this point and there was a general acknowledgement during the meeting by Councilman Thallemer that CR 175E would not be a safe bypass to accommodate the expected heavy volume of diverted traffic. This should have already been evaluated as part of any proper planning.
A Martin's Supermarket executive said they would have considered other locations in Warsaw if they had known CR 100E would be closed.
While the Aviation Board has relied upon purported concerns as to diverted flights due to runway contamination in inclement weather (i.e., snow/ice/water), it was unable to identify any flights actually diverted because of any such runway contamination. On this point, an experienced pilot with a major orthopedic company pointed out that the Warsaw airport did a great job keeping the runway decontaminated and flight diversion has not been an issue. He also pointed out that with new technology, planes do not need the longer runway to take off.
Rather than a legitimate need for a runway expansion, the driving force behind the current expansion efforts ultimately appears to be the availability of stimulus/FAA (our federal tax) dollars which may not be available at some point in the future. What is wrong with this logic? The Aviation Board has attempted to move forward with a runway expansion project 1) without clear confirmation of the actual need; 2) without conducting any economic impact, traffic or other studies relative to the public's interest; and 3) without properly and timely communicating and coordinating with others who would be clearly impacted by the closure of CR 100E, including the Warsaw Community Schools concerning bus transportation plans, local residents and the county commissioners concerning the ability of other county roads to safely handle the heavy volume of diverted traffic. I support progress but progress and bad planning do not go hand in hand.
Sariah Morgan
Warsaw, via e-mail[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092