tkhayes 348 #26 December 14, 2012 It's not really an FAA thing. The funding is from Aviation fuel taxes (federal obviously) but the money is coming from the FLORIDA Dept of Transportation, so things have transferred somewhere along the way. FAA has already stated that the City can do whatever they want, which is our issue. The City is stating that they are being 'told' to do it, which is not true and the FAA confirmed it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #27 December 15, 2012 We surpassed 2500 signatures today. Thanks so much for everyone that has supported this and I expect the City will take notice. Most of the City Council members were elected with between 200 and 400 votes. I might have to brag about our results. I hand delivered printed lists of the petition signers to the City and the Airport management today and we will be on the agenda of the Airport Authority on Monday at 530pm at City Hall if anyone is interested. thanks again everyone, the support is overwhelming. The petition will still remain open for a few more days Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dthames 0 #28 December 15, 2012 While not an expert at all, I am pretty sure I have reason to believe that the swoop pond is home to the Amblema neislerii. Which is listed as endangered. Any construction within 400 meters should be carefully considered. Just a thought.Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #29 December 15, 2012 that's funny as hell. I wonder what kind of mileage I might get out of it.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Akokisa 0 #30 December 15, 2012 QuoteWe surpassed 2500 signatures today. Thanks so much for everyone that has supported this and I expect the City will take notice. Most of the City Council members were elected with between 200 and 400 votes. I might have to brag about our results. I think most of those signatures from our national and international sport, are not in a position to vote for the local city council there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 150 #31 December 15, 2012 If it impinges on the swoop area, can you not argue that the fence will present a hazard to life and limb. That argument worked for me one time, back in the day when we changed our student rigs to squares and the airport wanted to build a fence which ran close to our landing area. Fortunately the decision makers were all involved in aviation at the time, and saw my point. But that was back in the day when common sense was a lot more common........My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rifleman 70 #32 December 16, 2012 QuoteLots more to it of course, but this will cramp our business and slow down the operation. We may have to cancel the CP Nationals in May if they build a fence that interferes with the swoop pond and creates a hazard. We are under contractual obligation to host it. The City might be able to build a fence, but that also does not free them of the tortuous consequences if they do so. Could you not threaten to sue them for loss of earnings and any charges incurred for breaching your contract to host the CP Nationals? I'm fairly sure that it would be substantially more than the cost of the fencing depending on how many years the contract runs for. just my 0.02c as an outsider.Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #33 December 16, 2012 That is pretty much the case. The City actually HAS the right to do anything they want, even on our leased property (which physically is on the airport property). They have every right to, but they are not immune to damages nor compensation. Largely this is the case that we are making. It is right in the lease, article 13, regarding government regulations that improvements and change scan be made by the entities, but not without every best effort to preserve the rights of the tenant and if they cannot, then not without compensation. I expect the compensation will far outweigh the value of cutting us off from airport access. The RV park in an 'incompatible use' on the airport and that is fact from the FAA and other aviation agencies. However it also have always been there, has always been approved to be there (in our lease) so we argue that the RV park is a 'approved activity' and the tenants are therefore 'approved' to be there. Don't like it or you need to change it? Fine then MOVE it. But don't build barricades that solve YOUR RV park problem and create a hazard and dysfunctional uses of our property, which again, you already approved. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdog 0 #34 December 19, 2012 Quote I think most of those signatures from our national and international sport, are not in a position to vote for the local city council there. Yes, but I don't know if they will see my notes I put when I signed, but if they do.... I itemized all the money I spent at the DZ, and which types of establishments earned money from me (hotels, restaurants, employees and freelancers of the DZ who are local residents, rental car agencies, etc) all received my revenue. As an out of state tourist my money adds a lot to the tax base (city money to spend) and employment of people (who pay taxes and elect people). Perhaps my out-of-state cash influx is more important to the economy than in-state re-cycling of the same money. Most cities try REAL hard to get tourist money.... This DZ is a valuable asset to the community. If it loses tourist appeal (in my case if Bram no did not have his rating course there) – the city would have lost $3,500-$4,000 in out of state cash into their economy. I am one of many. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CSpenceFLY 1 #36 December 19, 2012 Hard to see why this is a complicated subject for more and more politicians. Funny how when federal money is involved it usually involves either someone or a local business getting the shaft. Make you wonder about the over all agenda??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpwally 0 #37 December 19, 2012 WTF,,,time for a new airport..... smile, be nice, enjoy life FB # - 1083 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #38 December 20, 2012 We will be making sure that everyone on the City Council, the Airport Authority and the City Management gets to see the comments and the signatures. So far, we brought it all to the airport authority, 2700 signatures, no one even batted an eye, which is a sad commentary. As someone said, federal/state money involved and no one seems to care that someone is getting the shaft. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krip 2 #39 December 20, 2012 Quote We will be making sure that everyone on the City Council, the Airport Authority and the City Management gets to see the comments and the signatures. So far, we brought it all to the airport authority, 2700 signatures, no one even batted an eye, which is a sad commentary. As someone said, federal/state money involved and no one seems to care that someone is getting the shaft. In spite of the economy there seems to be a lot of homeland security money being spread around. Our county mounties got a brand new turbo C-206 for only $!.5 million all fedeeral $$. Lots of bells and whistles: to find the bad guys in the dark etc. We're located minute away from the port of tacoma. Gotta keep the commies Oops me bad terrorists away.http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/12/17/2405419/new-police-airplane-on-its-way.htmlOne Jump Wonder Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dthames 0 #40 August 4, 2014 Ever since this thread was started I have been meaning to stop and take pictures of an airport fence that I drive by (once in a while). I finally took the time to stop. Normal "security" fence [inline fence2.jpg] End of normal "security" fence [inline fence1.jpg]Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #41 August 4, 2014 That fence is to keep people from stealing hay. The gap is to keep hay thieves from tearing up the fence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #42 August 4, 2014 That 3ft high fence at Zhizzie will surely stop the terrorists though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpwally 0 #43 August 12, 2014 forgot all about this thread,,,how did it turn out ? how bad is it ? thankssmile, be nice, enjoy life FB # - 1083 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hillson 0 #44 August 14, 2014 jumpwallyforgot all about this thread,,,how did it turn out ? how bad is it ? thanks Pretty much a nothingburger...for the most part the fence runs around the airport perimeter. It is topped in bright yellow so it is very easy to see from the ground and in the air. I'm guessing there were some strongly worded letters etc exchanged which put the kibosh on the original dumbass plan. There is a mini fence that encloses some of the RV park... Serves no purpose that I can tell other than someone made money installing it. It is a bit of a goof. I'm sure someone will run into it someday. People aren't supposed to hit trees and buildings yet they do that too...lol Don't land out / in a tree to the south and you won't even know it is there (no more easy cut through). 100% success rate with the new fence - zero terrorist infiltrations since installation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 150 #46 August 15, 2014 But will it keep out a terrorist who comes by parachute?.My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #47 August 15, 2014 Only if he's 2 ft tall and lands outside the fence. And can't see the open gates. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 150 #48 August 15, 2014 And he's carrying a ladder? What then?. Huh? huh?.My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 8 #49 August 16, 2014 It would be far easier to just fly out of a grass strip that has no security. I know of a few within a short flight of zhills. It's a dumb idea but makes people think it's more secure."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #50 August 16, 2014 What people think a 3 ft high fence is "secure"??? Government wast of money. Period. (not directed at you, just replying in thread ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
