HLRA: Airport Not at Play
Following confusion over Navy meetings in which an airfield was one of four options presented, the Horsham Land Redevelopment Authority said an airfield is not planned for Willow Grove air base.
Photos
Pdfs
As the Navy continues with its two-year-long environmental impact statement of 862 acres of shuttered Willow Grove air base, local officials said the land will not be home to flying missions in its next life.
The Horsham Land Redevelopment Authority reiterated its mantra Wednesday, on the heels of a pair of Navy open house meetings in which four options - including an airfield - were presented on posters to the public.
For more news and updates about Hatboro and Horsham, subscribe to our free newsletter,"like" us on Facebook or follow @Hatboropatch on Twitter.
Officials said phones have been ringing and email inboxes have been flooded by residents concerned over the possibility of an airport. Their question, officials said, is why the flight alternative is part of the equation again.
The runway closed in March 2011 and the HLRA, since soundly rejecting it in July 2011, said it has no plans to reopen it. The Navy, HLRA Executive Director Mike McGee said, is following the law in presenting other redevelopment options in addition to the locally approved plan.
"They are required as part of the (environmental impact statement) to study alternatives in addition to the HLRA approved plan," McGee told Patch. "They stated at the open house and in their handouts that they will dispose of the property in a manner consistent with the HLRA redevelopment plan and it will be subject to zoning and other land use controls and restrictions that might be placed on the property by Horsham Township and/or the HLRA."
McGee said consideration of the additional redevelopment options causes the "confusion."
"Some people actually think that the Navy is studying all of those options as alternatives to our plan," McGee said, adding that the federal government is "not going to be second guessing" the local board. "The HLRA approved the redevelopment plan and htat’s how the project’s going to be built out."
Besides the airfield option and the HLRA's preferred redevelopment, the Navy also showed an alternative involving higher density housing - 1,999 units instead of 1,486 units.
The other option the Navy is reviewing is the "no action alternative," which would keep the land as it is now, vacant and unused and owned by the federal government. Officials have said this option is highly unlikely because the Navy's intent, as McGee puts it, is to "get rid of the property" as quickly as possible, while making money on its transfer.
The HLRA, during Wednesday's meeting, approved the submission of a letter to David Drozd, director BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, highlighting long-held local concerns related to the base's redevelopment.
The three-page letter listed traffic; remediation of existing environmental sites; non-existent water supplies and sewage treatment; stormwater control and "significant flooding problems in the region"; the benefits of open space and a new middle school for Hatboro-Horsham School District; and an airfield reuse alternative as concerns.
The letter asks that the Navy consider the "negative impact of the aviation use to economic redevelopment," as well as the "resulting impact to the quality of life and real estate values."
The HLRA's plan, which is anchored on a 133-acre office park projected to create more than 7,000 jobs and a $457 million annual payroll upon build out, would better address the need for economic development, according to McGee's letter.
Further, according to McGee's letter, an airport, as a tax-exempt entity, would negatively impact local tax streams, including the Hatboro-Horsham School District, which typically receives $650,000 in federal impact aid per year. Once the land is transferred out of federal ownership, those monies would disappear.
Until last summer, the airport was one of several options under HLRA review.
"The HLRA's development plan studied in great detail the potential for an airport use at the site and concluded that the market would not support the use," McGee wrote in the letter. "Since that time the aviation demand had continued to decline in the region."
Share your two cents
Those with concerns related to an airport, other redevelopment uses, or the site's environmental factors can send comments to the Navy through Dec. 31. Comments can be emailed to david.drozd@navy.mil, faxed to 215-897-4902, or mailed to: Director, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Attn: Willow Grove EIS 4911 South Broad St., Building 679, Philadelphia PA 19112-1303.
The Navy will be presenting its draft environmental impact statement in summer 2013. The process is expected to conclude by winter 2014. See the attached PDFs for more details.
In This article
-
NAS-JRB Willow Grove
Route 611, Horsham, PA -
-
-
-
Hatboro-Horsham School District
229 Meetinghouse Rd, Horsham, PA -
Mike Shortall
10:30 pm on Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Geez, people, calm down. If those few who went to the Environmental Impact Study presentations (There was a grand total of 13 people signed in on that first night when I got there two hours into the session.) had PAID ATTENTION, they would have realized that the Navy EIS is MANDATED to evaluate - and evaluate only - a minimum of THREE potential usage scenarios.
The three range form the DENSEST development proposal to the LEAST DENSE proposal, which naturally would be an airport since you certainly wouldn't put much - if any development on an airport property.
That does not mean an airport is being considered. It's just a way for the Navy to complete ONE STUDY that addresses ALL POSSIBLE scenarios. That way the LRA (HLRA) isn't conducting and PAYING FOR redundant studies every time a different density scenario is considered.
This does not mean anyone is considering an airport.
Mike Shortall
11:36 pm on Wednesday, December 19, 2012
And the question posed here is silly. (Sorry, Theresa!) The Navy has no legal role in making redevelopment or airport decisions because they disposed of the base - deciding they didn't need it and didn't want it - through the BRAC process in 2005.
Theresa Katalinas
6:14 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Mike,
I think I clearly stated, not only in the headline, but in the body of the article that an airport is not being considered. The poll is a hypothetical question.
Mike Shortall
1:02 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
I understand that, Theresa. But in my opinion, it's such a poll question - worded the way it is - that leads people to think that such a thing is actually still on the table and a possibility.
mac
8:50 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Well it might not be a bad thing to reconsider an airport. And a local trauma area.
The weather patterns that have caused major damage, if we need supplies flown in it would make sense to have that available. The acidents in Horsham especially along rte 611 certaimly warrant a closer facility to handle the injured. Especially since no one seems to be in any hurry to slow down!
Mike Shortall
1:02 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
It's an economic non-starter for the immediate area, especially Horsham Township, since they will be losing about $800,000 in federal impact fees in the next year or two or three. The Township - and its tax-payers - need a revenue stream from that property to overcome that loss. ANd just as a refresher, the only viable offer to manage an airport there offered the measly sum of $5000/year (not a misprint).
Disaster relief - if ever really needed - could be launched from any of the other airports in the Bucks/Mont area. And all you need for medavac purposes is a large enough piece of open field. Not a very compelling reason for the economic burden of an airport.
BrianT
1:02 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Does the Navy(DOD) still own the land or not?
I really don't know!
Theresa Katalinas
1:06 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Brian,
The federal government owns the land and will continue to own it at least until the environmental impact statement is completed (2014).
Robert Applegarth
1:02 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Whenever an Authority/Board is set-up by a governing entity, you can pretty much count on the outcome of any decision favoring that of the governing entity which empowered the Authority/Board. The members of the Authority/Board have been hand selected for that very purpose. I would be very surprised if anything other than the first suggested use is not approved. It might be altered slightly, but it will be very similar to what the governing entity wanted from the start.
Bob
1:34 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
It won't be an airport because the US government is expanding the Philly airport at a cost of at least $8 BILLION.
Bob
1:38 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
It could be used as a future prison for future gun criminals. New gun laws are coming and prison space will be needed.
Robert Applegarth
10:07 pm on Saturday, December 22, 2012
Bob, "...a future prison for future gun criminals." This comment is a joke, right? Just what kind of "...future gun criminals." do you anticipate being incarcerated in your new "prison"?
mac
1:38 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Well Mike you may be right an economic non- starter but the one thing Horsham does not need is another empty industrial park. Take a good look around at all of the empty
office buildings in this township. So why build another ghost town? And do we really need another school building? Especially if they are going to rebuild Hallowell? Why not make that rebuild the middle school and move Hallowell or elementary students to the former KV site? Or even better move KV to Simmons that way the older students are all in the same area. Makes more sense for activities as well. As far as ownership of the property now it doesn't matter it is becoming an eyesore. Certainly not the manicured lanscape that it was prior to this.
And what about an energy source?, It would be nice to see solar grids bringing clean energy into Horsham and lowering the usage rates for the whole township. Not totally sure that an airport couldn't bring in more if there was an aviation school and associated aerospace businesses as well.
Mike Shortall
2:25 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
It's common knowledge that it will probably take years before any significant development goes on there, so there certainly will be a period of transition where the airbase is going to be a "negative feature". And despite the best efforts to plan the entire development out (which is really just an exercise to prove to the Federal Government that the LRA has a plan and the capability to manage the property successfully), no one KNOWS what the end product will really look like.
I think a solar farm would certainly work there. I won't go into all my arguments against an airport, but you can read them at www.crankymanslawn.com. Search the tags "JRB Willow Grove, HLRA, Horsham".
Bob
1:44 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Mac With a gas pipeline running through it a turbine generation plant would be a better idea.
mac
1:51 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
It would also be interesting to know just how many above highway crosswalks they are going to build on 611 and Horsham road for the foot traffic to be able to get from one side to another. Because right now there is no safe way to get across.
Bob
1:55 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Mac don't forget about the bike paths
mac
2:13 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Not opposed to turbines anything that helps. Maybe we should think about a township recycling plant as well.
As far as bike paths wouldn't want to be on them either. The accidents occurring on 611 have been deadly,another one last week. So short of underground or over ground they are the only two ways to cross that road.
and even though the biased hlra board thinks they are doing the township a favor with a "main street" they really only half listened to what people were saying at the meetings. And yes I attended them to know that.
qdogPa
4:33 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
I think Horsham needs more housing, there is not enough new construction in the area ;)
And a big box store like Home Depot would be nice, i hate driving 3 miles to the one in Montgomeryville, and the 5 miles to Warrington is really annoying. ;)
Seriously, the current concepts for the site are terrible
Bob
9:35 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
or the home depot With its own interchange
Robert Applegarth
10:28 pm on Saturday, December 22, 2012
To qdogPa: If you can't handle a three or five(for you, 3 or 5) mile drive, then I would suggest one of four options. 1.Stay HOME! 2. Stop driving, because I'm sure you're driving the other folks, who can drive at LEAST three or five(3 or 5) miles, CRAZY. 3. Move next door to one of the Home Depots so you can walk there without driving. 4. Get someone to drive for you.
Bob
11:48 am on Friday, December 21, 2012
how about thinking outside the box and turn the place into a landfill that when filled could be turned into a ski slope in 15 years? That would generate revenue for Horsham.
Chris
7:19 pm on Saturday, December 22, 2012
Anything BUT more homes and office buildings, PLEASE! If you think Rt 611, Horsham Rd, and County Line Rd are a rush hour nightmare now...
qdogPa
5:32 pm on Sunday, December 23, 2012
Mr Applegarth, my comment was meant to be a sarcastic one, but i guess you missed it. :)
Robert Applegarth
8:11 pm on Sunday, December 23, 2012
To qdogPa: Guess I did, sorry.
Hope everyone has a Great Holiday Season and a Good New Year.
Bill
9:44 am on Saturday, December 29, 2012
They should build an amusement park!
Robert Applegarth
11:25 am on Saturday, December 29, 2012
Why, so they can make it into another mall like they did to the Willow Grove Amusement Park? Besides, the base was an amusement park at least once a year when the Blue Angels performed. What a gathering of people. Guess we won't have that entertainment anymore. Hell, I was amused every weekend I went for my drills...even got paid for it by Uncle Sam. LOL
pat polichetti
1:28 pm on Sunday, March 17, 2013
Well, obviously people who want that land "redeveloped" into businesses, "town centers" and housing, and more stores, haven't driven north on 611 to see all the stores, shops, malls and EMPTY space. And obviously haven't driven to the Fort Washington Industrial Park, which is probably at least 80 percent EMPTY. Hey, yeah, guys, how's that profitable taxbase working out for you these days?
Are all you bleeding hearts happy about the deserted base (except for the unit still there)? And all that decrease in traffic (if you think that's a serious comment, drive County Line Rd. this week and tell me what you think) not to mention all that QUIET wanted from not hearing all those nuisance noisemaking airplanes? Of course, those who didn't want noise moved near an airbase... that was there first... yeah, that makes sense.... oh well, onto the next rant. Ha!