A comment via email from someone who flies planes.
" Good article but one thing you may want to look into further.
The majority of planes taking off to the North do so because of winds. Small planes cannot safely depart with more than an 8 knot tailwind. Larger planes are very often restricted by company policy and can only take off with up to 15 knots tailwind. It’s vastly safer taking off into the wind because it lowers rotation speed and also uses up to 1/3 less runway giving you more time in an emergency.
Additionally, I don’t believe the tower can limit northbound traffic if it does not affect safety. What you are talking about is the noise abatement procedure which could be modified to no northbound traffic except for winds. Of course the noise abatement procedure is voluntary. It is listed on all relevant charts and on ATIS for the airport. However, the tower does not deny departure requests because they feel like it, there must be a good reason that can be tied to the FAR/AIM."
What does it say about our community when our leaders are so at odds with the people they are supposed to represent that the people need to take them to court? It is very expensive to litigate. I could not raise the necessary funds to litigate Bluebird.
Another action would be a recall. Again, The Troika knows how difficult that is. It take a lot of time, money, and effort. The Mayor survived a recall move in his first term.
?Doesn’t “the public” include businesses that need customers to survive? Doesn’t it include employees at those businesses that need customers so that they can get a reasonable paycheck to support themselves and their families? Doesn’t it include local residents who patronize those businesses that wouldn’t be able to survive without the support of locals and tourists alike? Doesn’t “the public” include visitors who visit the WRV to visit family, friends, or just to vacation? Doesn’t it include various employees at all of the essential local services (fire, police, healthcare, education, etc.) who patronize all the local businesses that are supported by a robust tourist industry?
And, yes, it includes people like me who enjoy a reasonable number of flights directly in and out of Friedman!
My response: of course. No one, including me, is calling for an end to tourism. I am not calling for a shutdown of SUN. But when is enough enough? Do we need unlimited growth in tourism? Do we need more hotels owned by people outside the community? Why is growth for growth's sake the goal? Why aren't we doing a better job at planning and preserving what makes our community our community? Why can't we diversify beyond low-wage transient jobs?
Today I was driving north between Hailey and Ketchum around 4 PM. From Hailey north to the upper Buttercup intersection, the traffic was bumper tp bumper. Is this what we want for the WRV? I know, I don't.
Ha! Hailey won’t move, but if the usual devel path around growing airports holds for SUN, middle class people who live near SUN will leave for quieter climes. So, in a way, what that person wanted will happen.
Besides the parking on main street and the lot loss they took away 10 spots on the south side of 4th street already when is it going to end and for what real purpose
If you ignore what The Troika says, and look at what they do, the plan seems to be to close the real estate value gap with Aspen by copying Aspen's development model. Get rid of the current locals and replace them with the ultra-rich (second homeowners and tourists), and import the poor, to serve the rich in low-wage jobs with no career path such that the workforce requires taxpayer-subsidized housing and can never escape it. I wish I were wrong, but I see no evidence that I am not.
A comment via email from someone who flies planes.
" Good article but one thing you may want to look into further.
The majority of planes taking off to the North do so because of winds. Small planes cannot safely depart with more than an 8 knot tailwind. Larger planes are very often restricted by company policy and can only take off with up to 15 knots tailwind. It’s vastly safer taking off into the wind because it lowers rotation speed and also uses up to 1/3 less runway giving you more time in an emergency.
Additionally, I don’t believe the tower can limit northbound traffic if it does not affect safety. What you are talking about is the noise abatement procedure which could be modified to no northbound traffic except for winds. Of course the noise abatement procedure is voluntary. It is listed on all relevant charts and on ATIS for the airport. However, the tower does not deny departure requests because they feel like it, there must be a good reason that can be tied to the FAR/AIM."
Another comment via email:
"Perry, it sounds like attorney time!! Especially regarding the Washington lot!!"
What does it say about our community when our leaders are so at odds with the people they are supposed to represent that the people need to take them to court? It is very expensive to litigate. I could not raise the necessary funds to litigate Bluebird.
Another action would be a recall. Again, The Troika knows how difficult that is. It take a lot of time, money, and effort. The Mayor survived a recall move in his first term.
A comment that came into me via email:
?Doesn’t “the public” include businesses that need customers to survive? Doesn’t it include employees at those businesses that need customers so that they can get a reasonable paycheck to support themselves and their families? Doesn’t it include local residents who patronize those businesses that wouldn’t be able to survive without the support of locals and tourists alike? Doesn’t “the public” include visitors who visit the WRV to visit family, friends, or just to vacation? Doesn’t it include various employees at all of the essential local services (fire, police, healthcare, education, etc.) who patronize all the local businesses that are supported by a robust tourist industry?
And, yes, it includes people like me who enjoy a reasonable number of flights directly in and out of Friedman!
My response: of course. No one, including me, is calling for an end to tourism. I am not calling for a shutdown of SUN. But when is enough enough? Do we need unlimited growth in tourism? Do we need more hotels owned by people outside the community? Why is growth for growth's sake the goal? Why aren't we doing a better job at planning and preserving what makes our community our community? Why can't we diversify beyond low-wage transient jobs?
Today I was driving north between Hailey and Ketchum around 4 PM. From Hailey north to the upper Buttercup intersection, the traffic was bumper tp bumper. Is this what we want for the WRV? I know, I don't.
I was once told, in sincerity, that Hailey should be moved to accommodate the airport.
Ha! Hailey won’t move, but if the usual devel path around growing airports holds for SUN, middle class people who live near SUN will leave for quieter climes. So, in a way, what that person wanted will happen.
Besides the parking on main street and the lot loss they took away 10 spots on the south side of 4th street already when is it going to end and for what real purpose
If you ignore what The Troika says, and look at what they do, the plan seems to be to close the real estate value gap with Aspen by copying Aspen's development model. Get rid of the current locals and replace them with the ultra-rich (second homeowners and tourists), and import the poor, to serve the rich in low-wage jobs with no career path such that the workforce requires taxpayer-subsidized housing and can never escape it. I wish I were wrong, but I see no evidence that I am not.