.

Oxford Airport to Get $5 Million

Money will go toward buying homes near the airport.

 will receive $5 million to acquire land and homes near the airport, two Connecticut lawmakers announced in a news release Tuesday.

Senators Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., praised the release of over $8 millionn from the Federal Aviation Administration for improvements to Bradley International Airport in Windsor Locks and the Waterbury-Oxford Airport, which is located in Oxford.

Bradley International will receive $3.36 million for sound insulation of approximately 100 homes in the Windsor Locks area of Hartford, and the Waterbury-Oxford Airport will receive $5 million for land acquisition of nearby homes impacted by airport noise, the release stated. Approximately 300 residents will benefit from these combined noise mitigation measures, according to the release. The homes affected near the Waterbury-Oxford Airport are in Middlebury.

“Bradley and Waterbury-Oxford are two essential airports in Connecticut,” Lieberman stated in the release. “It’s critical that we continue to invest in these airports, not only to increase safety and efficiency for the travelers who pass through them, but also to improve the quality of life for the many residents who live nearby, which these grants do.”

“These resources are essential to making necessary changes that benefit the people surrounding Bradley and Waterbury-Oxford Airports,” Blumenthal stated in the release. “It is essential that we continue to make the investments necessary that keep our infrastructure up to date – including our airports, roads and bridges – and I will continue to fight for these funds so that we are able to maintain and expand our transportation systems.”

State officials and other have studied the noise complaints at the airport for several years. A noise study completed last year indicates that the residents have reason for complaint because the area is considered a "noise impact area," per federal standards, according to a website formed in partnership with the state Department of Transportation titled www.oxcstudies.com that has information about the noise issues at the airport. The informational wesbite states the noise study indicated the following recommendations could be implemented:

  • Voluntary acquisition of homes in the Triangle Hills neighborhood located within the airport's Runway Protection Zone, or RPZ.
  • Voluntary acquisition or sound insulation of homes in the Triangle Hills neighborhood that are not within the RPZ.
  • Directing more aircraft activity to depart to the south when conditions permit, in order to reduce takeoffs over the populated areas of Middlebury.
  • Conduct other operational modifications that may reduce noise levels adjacent to the Airport and result in more consistent flight patterns.
  • Recommendations for local zoning and subdivision regulations that would reduce the future potential for airport noise impacts. These land use measures can only be implemented by the Towns.
T. Smith September 14, 2011 at 02:08 PM
Paul: Nice Job. Yes, The Triangle Hills neighborhood has homes within the Runway Protection Zone which will be removed in a voluntary plan with the homeowners. It is NOT "Eminent Domain."
T. Smith September 14, 2011 at 02:09 PM
I stand corrected on the number of homes being effected in the Runway Protection Zone...some other homes outside the Zone will get sound insulation.
T. Smith September 14, 2011 at 02:11 PM
Janis: The local tax collector collects a fee on each and every aircraft based on the weight of the airplane; the state also collects a registration fee. No, I don't know when the change occured - sorry.
Bonnie September 14, 2011 at 02:50 PM
Hey Tracy, fully agreed! Lots of money wasted!!! That 5 million SHOULD be put into education! Did everyone forget about our kids? As for the comments about fees and taxes on airplanes... Guess what? We pay the same taxes and insurance, gas tax etc on our vehicles. If you own a plane (my brother in law does) you've got money to pay to fly that plane around acting like your better than others whom don't. Why don't those plane owners shell out some money to purchase these homes, if you've got a plane in Oxford you should live right there, you wouldn't have to drive far to take your plane out. As far as the FAA goes, I guess if you cry long enough you can get your own way for making a mistake and purchasing a home near the airport. I'd be more worried about a plane landing in my back yard than the 30 seconds of noise of plane taking off! Shame on those people whom are going to sell their homes just so they don't have to listen to the planes. Will the FAA put new windows in my home too? I can hear em? What about the dog warden? Will she pay for new windows in my house because my neighbors have a dog that barks much longer than it takes for a plane to take off or land!
Suzanne Spinelli September 14, 2011 at 07:04 PM
I hate the airport. I wish they would shut it down. We can't afford to move at this point, but the noise doesn't really bother me much at all. If you notice, the article indicates that all the homes in the 'problem' area are in Middlebury. Oxford has no cross to bear with their own people because they shoved THEIR airport at the end of THEIR town, and we folks in Middlebury can do NOTHING about it.
Dr. Gagas September 14, 2011 at 11:48 PM
Fact - homes were built before the airport was constructed review FAR regulations and related to airport noise regulations and runway protection zones for factual information Fact - prior airport expansion (recent) and FAR regulation changes moved the runway protection zone into the neighborhood Fact - poor and uniformed (ignorant) people should not comment on things they are have no idea of what they are talking about. Read the noise study on the web site in the article.
Greg September 15, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, You people that are commenting on this and do not live in this area should mind your own buisness. I moved into the Middlebury area over 16 yrs ago when the airport was for weekend worrier fliers, that was fine. Since then it has grown into a lot bigger airport. (thats progress). If the state and government allow this growth than they must deal with the issues that arise. If this is to buy people out, than so be it. Like I said before, if you do not live in the area, than mind your own buisness.
Ed Rowland September 15, 2011 at 12:37 AM
I grew up on Christian St.before the airpory was built.The road was dotted with small farms up into Middlebury near 188.Much nicer back then.Triangle Hill was a farm when I was very young.Much of the property was once owned by Uniroyal.There was a Uniroyal farm also.I never did like the Airport.I now live on Towner Lane off of Christian St.I don't really notice the noise to much.The airport has been owned by the state since day one.Oxford didn't just decide to put an airport.It is a very tough issue for the people that live in Middlebury.
Janis Hardy September 15, 2011 at 12:55 AM
Hi Ed! Someone once told me that the Oxford Airport was built in the 60's for the benefit of or at the behest of Uniroyal, who was located in Middlebury. Middlebury/Uniroyal didn't have enough available land to locate the airport in Middlebury, and the state decided to stick it with us because the space at the top of the hill near your family's farm was convenient for Uniroyal. Had you ever heard that? I know there are/were many residents of Oxford who were not happy with the state's decision then and still aren't. Sure, the town may get some PILOT funds to offset the loss of tax dollars on the property, but we also have to deal with some of the consequences: namely being thought of as the bad neighbor.
Rachael R September 15, 2011 at 01:21 AM
I too, am not a fan of the airport, and saw no reason for the expansion. In a state the size of Connecticut, it is unnecessary to have so many airports.
Ed Rowland September 15, 2011 at 01:38 AM
Hi Janice,Luckily my family's farm was left kind of intact til recently.I've never heard that it was built for the sake of Uniroyal but nothing surprises me anymore.A lot of people were forced to sell their property to the state for the airport.Sadly the state feels the need to keep expanding the airport.What happens in years to come when the state wants to expand the airport even more?Do they keep pushing down Christian Rd to 188.Lots of homes in the area.When is enough,enough.
MyGoodPeople September 15, 2011 at 02:12 AM
A certain multi poster obviously does not know what she is speaking about. The following are a few areas where you can educate yourself and realize aircraft ownership comes with many perks. Such as being exempt from sales tax not only for the purchase but also the parts and repairs. Here is a link to the Ct Department of Revenue Services website proving it. (http://www.ct.gov/drs/cwp/view.asp?a=1477&q=2699201) the following is located 2/3 down the web page: Flyable aircraft sold by a manufacturer of aircraft located in this state to certificated or licensed carriers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce or to nonresidents for use exclusively outside Connecticut. Purchasers must complete Affidavit SUT-16a-3. Conn. Gen. Stat. §12-412(20) Aircraft having a maximum certificated takeoff weight of 6,000 pounds or more. Conn. Gen. Stat. §12-412(99) Repair or replacement parts and repair services for use in aircraft or in the significant overhauling or rebuilding of aircraft or aircraft parts or components on a factory basis. The purchaser must complete CERT-110, Aircraft Repair Services Certificate and Aircraft Repair and Replacement Parts Certificate. Conn. Gen. Stat. 12-412(76) and (77) as amended by PA 06-186, Section 74)
MyGoodPeople September 15, 2011 at 02:19 AM
And as far as the aircraft registration fees here they are: Sec. 13b-39d. - Registration fee. The owner shall pay a fee to the municipal registration official for each aircraft so numbered or registered in accordance with the following schedule: Gross Weight (lbs.) Fee Less than 3,000 $ 90.00 3,001 _ 4,500 $ 250.00 4,501 _ 8,000 $ 700.00 8,001 _ 12,500 $ 1,500.00 12,501 and over $ 2,500.00 Just another perk.
MyGoodPeople September 15, 2011 at 02:31 AM
The State of Ct has a registration fee in lieu of property taxation you can educate yourself by going here: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0018.htm Also here if you scroll 2/3 down the web page you can read further about yet more Conneticut aircraft ownership perks. Yet us common folk pay tax on everything we own? I don't know how you feel but I think it is just WRONG. If these companies can own the plane they should pay taxes just like me
Janis Hardy September 15, 2011 at 03:21 AM
Is this an annual fee? If so, it seems similar to the fees us normal folks pay to register our motor vehicles and such, except we only have to register those every two years, and I do think we pay less than the $250 and up you have quoted. How is this a perk?
MyGoodPeople September 15, 2011 at 03:40 AM
When buying a car you pay sales tax on the full amount and you pay a registration/title fee. Each year you pay personal property tax on that car. The "only" fee aircraft incur is the registration fee; there is NO SALES TAX OR PROPERTY TAX on aircraft and there is NO TAX on parts or repairs. How is this fair?
Janis Hardy September 15, 2011 at 03:47 AM
This post was very interesting. I did click on your link, but it appears the requested article is no longer published.... (perhaps you have a typo in the link.) However, I did pick up on something surprising: from my reading of what you posted, it seems that ONLY flyable aircraft (and spare parts and repairs) sold by a manufacturer of aircraft LOCATED IN THIS STATE is exempt from the sales tax. So I wonder, if somebody purchases an airplane that was manufactured somewhere other than Connecticut, do they have to pay sales tax?... as well as sales tax on the parts and service? Now, considering the aircraft (including helicopter) manufacturers we have in this state, I would guess that this law was passed to encourage the sale of CT made products. It appears the owner has to fill out numerous forms in order to obtain the tax exemption, (and likely file in quadruplicate), but I suspect the exemption may be worth it. So, if one was wealthy enough to own a multi-million dollar helicopter manufactured by Sikorsky Aircraft, or an aircraft engine manufactured by Pratt & Whitney, they probably get to buy replacement parts and have it serviced here in CT sales-tax free. Does anyone else manufacture aircraft here in Connecticut?
Craig Zac September 15, 2011 at 11:41 AM
why are aircraft not taxed, and parts?? did someone in government say, "Hey, i own a plane and dont want to pay taxes!"? its nuts. Esp if said Aircraft is used for business related things. Why do they get breaks and perks when the normal, everyday working, blue collar man gets nothing? Thats it, Im opening a church and buying a plane!!
Craig Zac September 15, 2011 at 11:43 AM
So if you bought one of these would you have to pay taxes on it?? http://www.terrafugia.com/
kathy johnson September 18, 2011 at 11:16 AM
My good people and Janis. Great conversation. I know that some do not like to reveal their identity but I sure wish I knew My Good People. Seems you do your homework as does Janis. It saves lazy people like me the trouble of researching the issue.
kathy johnson September 18, 2011 at 12:08 PM
I never minded the air port when I moved to Oxford in 1976. This expansion does concern me in this respect. I am fully aware that we all want to achieve lower taxes and ecconmic development. I would like to point out that Oxford is unique in that we have the Stevenson Dam,power lines, gas lines ,an expanding air port, and a future gas to electricity power plant on land now owned by GE all in close proxsimity to each other. Dare I say out loud that this can pose a real safety danger to Oxford and nearby towns. If you think this is far fetched remember Oxford's anthrax crisis. It concerns me that if a large company like GE comes they will own us politically and financially. Sadly this out of our control. I do support ecconomic development and I do support Gov. Malloys efforts and always believed that he was not planning to short change Oxford. I also believe that the quest for money clouds some realities.
kathy johnson September 18, 2011 at 12:17 PM
By the way when I was Firse Selectman if there had been any way I could have stopped the power plant without the fear of a large law suit I would have done so.
MyGoodPeople September 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM
Thank you Kathy. I do and have always loved the town of Oxford and am an avid reader/researcher on many topics and get my material from many forms of media ie; patch, and other online news, television but limited, radio and of course accessible government sites. I do not believe in commenting without first knowing the facts. I find it bothersome when folks will make comments that sound like they know but are only blowing smoke.
MyGoodPeople September 18, 2011 at 01:14 PM
In my opinion it is unfortunate that they chose the most beautiful part of Oxford for the airport and industrial zone. Understandably it was for the location but it truly is a lovely part of town. Having grown up in town I remember going to watch the planes take off and land. At that time it was a small airport more or less for hobby pilots. What scares me about this current situation is we can now easily become a like Bradley airport. That is why the folks with the big wallets pushed for the expanded runway and the present property purchases. I am all for progress and development but as in all of life there is a fine line regretfully we have crossed it. The growth of the airport will indeed be good for some businesses and will bring in a few new jobs but at what cost? Hold on Oxford our quaint wonderful town is forever changed. So those of us that wish not to live in what is versus' what was will move on. The new residents moving in to what is and excited about it will take up nest and progress continues. It is the cycle of life. I will forever love my little town of Oxford. PS-I too think Governor Malloy is doing the best he can with the crappy hand he was dealt. He does what he says he will and is not afraid to step on feet never minds toes. and that is admirable.
kathy johnson September 18, 2011 at 09:12 PM
Bravo MGP. I have never been afraid to speak up and take a stand. There are a lot of talking heads out there who put their own spin on things based on no solid evidence and sadly people believe them. When I was First Selectman I learned a good lesson about Charters and Regulations. They are all written in such a way that unless you have a legal background or more importantly the advise of an attorney you risk making a big fool of youself. I have read a lot of foolish things on this blog lately. My Best,Kathy
The Good People of Triangle-Hills April 13, 2013 at 09:45 PM
OMG. Someone has to say it. Who are these multi-posting, self-proclaimed experts? Quite simply, and with all due respect, who gives a hoot what you think on these issues unless you live in this neighborhood. Not a heart-felt moment of empathy in any of your "fact-sheet" postings or self-righteous diatribes. Please get off your soap-boxes, get your noses out of our business and satisfy your anal-retentive need to research something or to pound your Tarzan-like chest, elsewhere. Good God!
Jennifer Hamilton November 02, 2013 at 07:21 PM
Okay, I know I am extremely late to the party, but if anyone gets this comment and could respond, I would greatly appreciate it! I used to live in Middlebury on triangle Boulevard many years ago. I recently was very excited to see on Zillow my old house on the market, so I decided to take a drive over there. To my horror and shock, my house had completely vanished, along with all the homes of my neighbors. After investigating and a little research I realize it is due to the airport being built. Can anyone answer my question in regards to people that want to stay in their home? Do they have to move? Is the state buying all of their homes and forcing them out or giving them an option? Are they going to stop paving the streets if the homeowners decide to stay there? And is there anyway possible to purchase a home in that area ever again? Thank you in advance for anyone who can answer my questions!
T. Smith November 03, 2013 at 03:25 PM
Jennifer: The Master Plan for the Airport called for extending the runway - I think it was about 800 feet or so, but I don't remember exactly how much - and the extra length called for the removal of a number of homes in that area in the Runway Safety Zone at the end of the runway. In addition, a number of homes remaining received noise abatement measures (new windows, insulation, weatherstripping and the like) as part of the project. That land is not owned by the State and no homes will be built on the exact footprint where the removed homes once stood, but that does not mean the whole neighborhood is going away. To the best of my knowledge (which might be sparse at best) what's done is done.
T. Smith November 03, 2013 at 03:26 PM
Oops - typo in the previous post: That land is NOW owned by the State......
Jennifer Hamilton November 03, 2013 at 07:47 PM
Thanks so much for your response, T. Smith. I guess you really can't go home again! That was very informative. I appreciate it!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something