Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FAA grants $5 million to residents for noise levels
WTNH Television ^ | 09/13/2011

Posted on 09/14/2011 8:12:51 AM PDT by Puppage

Middlebury, Conn. (WTNH) - The FAA will provide $5 million in federal grant funding to residents affected by noise levels.

Congressman Chris Murphy spearheaded the project to get Middlebury residents who were affected by noise levels at the Waterbury-Oxford Airport.

Murphy claims that esidents of the Triangle Hills area of Middlebury have been adversely impacted by the growth in air traffic in and out of the airport.

The grant will fund the land acquisition of approximately 15 homes, including relocation of approximately 38 residents adversely impacted by noise.

"Although I would have preferred this funding had been released far sooner, I'm glad to see that the FAA is making good on its promise to the residents of Triangle Hills," said Murphy. "I've fought for years to secure this funding and ensure that home purchase valuations are fair and timely. This $5 million will go a long way toward moving affected homeowners at Waterbury-Oxford. "

Murphy has been pushing the FAA to expedite funding for this project since he came into office.


TOPICS: Government; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
500k? Are you kidding me?

residents who were affected by noise levels at the Waterbury-Oxford Airport

Define: affected

1 posted on 09/14/2011 8:12:51 AM PDT by Puppage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Puppage

which came first, the homes or the airport?


2 posted on 09/14/2011 8:15:49 AM PDT by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Which came first, the airport or the homes?

If the airport came first, these residents deserve NOTHING!

More wasted taxpayer money.


3 posted on 09/14/2011 8:16:56 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

The cycle is pretty much understood.

Airport moves out into the sticks, where they can buy large tracts of land for future expansion at a reasonable price.

Homes move to the airport, and surround the airport due tot he low property cost. It is understood that the airport will have noise, hence the less expensive lot prices.

Residents move in, the area grows as does air traffic.

Residents then complain about the airport disrupting their lives.


4 posted on 09/14/2011 8:18:28 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

must be some crappy homes, resale value probably sucks because of all the airport noise.

irony hurts sometimes


5 posted on 09/14/2011 8:18:28 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

I bought a home next to an airport and don’t like the noise; where do I go to collect my stupidity bonus?


6 posted on 09/14/2011 8:19:26 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (So much stress was put on Bush's Fault that it finally let go, magnitude 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0
which came first, the homes or the airport?

As I understand it, the airport.

7 posted on 09/14/2011 8:21:14 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
I bought a home next to an airport and don’t like the noise; where do I go to collect my stupidity bonus?

I heard a car horn this morning....that's gotta be worth a few grand, right?

8 posted on 09/14/2011 8:22:30 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

How many of these homeowners were behind on their mortgages I wonder.

Bad as this is, the worst part is the continuing disregard for the Constitution.

Interesting this is in CT; isn’t this the state where the so-called Eminent Domain Supreme Court BS ruling started?


9 posted on 09/14/2011 8:24:09 AM PDT by MichaelCorleone (Those who love liberty love Sarah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

This is like the idiots near me moving into a housing development right next to I-84.

Three weeks later the signs and protests go up crying about the traffic noise on the highway.

Too bad the highway predates the development by about 30 years and you can even see it from their property. Maybe they should have looked out a window when they were taking the tour with a real estate agent.


10 posted on 09/14/2011 8:29:36 AM PDT by headstamp 2 (Time to move forward not to the center.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Exactly! Why are Federal funds used for this? If U.S. taxpayers received a revenue from airports, I could then understand them having to ante up for the expansion costs. If growth has caused the need for airport expansion, let the airlines and the airport and its supportive industries remunerate these homeowners.


11 posted on 09/14/2011 8:30:10 AM PDT by liberalh8ter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

“I heard a car horn this morning....that’s gotta be worth a few grand, right?”

Please stand behind me in line to get your money. I am the victim of a dog that barked. And I think I heard the trash truck make a “beep beep” sound as it turned around on my street.


12 posted on 09/14/2011 8:34:05 AM PDT by CFIIIMEIATP737
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

I had a Real Estate Agent call the Tower once asking us to change the way we were landing while they showed a house. I hung up on them...


13 posted on 09/14/2011 8:35:03 AM PDT by PushinTin (Politicians are like diapers, the need to be changed often and for the same reason...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

...and the pork goes on.


14 posted on 09/14/2011 8:40:40 AM PDT by oldtimer (uee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

Airports are few, home are many.

Better to buy out a few homes than close an airport.

This is a great precedent.

Yes, I am a pilot, but closing airports is a bad decision for all, not just pilots.


15 posted on 09/14/2011 8:52:12 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CFIIIMEIATP737
I am the victim of a dog that barked. And I think I heard the trash truck make a “beep beep” sound as it turned around on my street.

Oh, the huge manatee!

How do you carry on each day?

16 posted on 09/14/2011 8:54:30 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
The cycle is pretty much understood.

Airport moves out into the sticks, where they can buy large tracts of land for future expansion at a reasonable price.

Homes move to the airport, and surround the airport due tot he low property cost. It is understood that the airport will have noise, hence the less expensive lot prices.

Residents move in, the area grows as does air traffic.

Residents then complain about the airport disrupting their lives.

Pretty much the same cycle is played out in rural farm communities.

Substitute "smells" for noise.

17 posted on 09/14/2011 9:02:44 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

And did the payoff correct anything. Are they still there and is airport traffic still the same. Sounds like a greedy scam to me.


18 posted on 09/14/2011 9:03:01 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru

i’m not saying the airport should be closed.

i’m more concerned with people who take advantage of cheap property due to it’s proximity to some sort of nuisance, then demand some sort of recompense.

these people knew they were moving next to an airport. tough on them. the taxpayers should not need to give the homeowners anything.


19 posted on 09/14/2011 9:03:46 AM PDT by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Very small airport came first, houses came second, runway expanded closer to the homes, runway expanded again even closer to the homes, runway wants to expand again almost into the living rooms of some of the homes.
20 posted on 09/14/2011 9:06:56 AM PDT by CT-Freeper (Visit CTF.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson