 |
|
Regulatory Brief
Lake Quannapowitt, Wakefield, MA
Contents:
- Summary
- The Issue
Summary
In 1980, the state barred the enforcement of any ordinance regulating seaplane operations
on any Great Pond unless such an ordinance was first approved by the Massachusetts
Aeronautics Commission (MAC). Such approval was never sought by or granted to the town of
Wakefield for a 1975 town bylaw prohibiting seaplane operations on the lake - that is,
until today.
On July 18th, the MAC will meet for a final vote on whether to approve the Wakefield bylaw.
If the MAC votes to approve the bylaw, it will set a precedent by accepting the town's
arguments that safety and the right to quiet enjoyment will be compromised by allowing
seaplane operations on the lake - a precedent that could easily be used against the
seaplane community at any one of the 250 other Great Ponds in the state.
|
| Impact: |
Immediate: Lake Quannapowitt
Long-term: State of Massachusetts
|
|
| Reference: |
SPA Comment Letter to MAC (PDF, 137KB)
|
|
| Timeline: |
1975 - Town of Wakefield passes bylaw prohibiting seaplane operations.
1980 - State of Massachusetts passes law authorizing towns to regulate seaplane
operations on great ponds within their boundaries, provided the Massachusetts Aeronautics
Commission approves such regulations.
1985 - Following a fatal powerboat collision involving alcohol, the Town of Wakefield
passed, and the state approved, a bylaw prohibiting the operation of motorboats with more than
10 horsepower.
1992 - Town of Wakefield bylaws overhauled.
August 15, 2000 - In response to an inquiry by a pilot about the legality of landing
on Lake Quannapowitt, Wakefield Town Counsel Thomas A. Mullen sends a letter to the MAC
requesting approval of Wakefield's bylaw.
October 11, 2000 - The first public hearing is held by MAC to consider approval of
the Wakefield bylaw.
November 10, 2000 - Wayne Kerchner, Chief Legal Counsel for the MAC, sends a letter to
Thomas Mullen requesting additional information in support of the Town's request.
July 18, 2001 - MAC meeting at which the final vote for or against acceptance of Wakefield's
bylaw is scheduled.
|
|
| Wakefield's Bylaw: |
Section 138-5: "No aircraft shall land or take off from the lake, except in the case of an emergency or with the
prior written approval of the Board of Public Works of the Town of Wakefield and the approval of state and federal
authorities where applicable." (Note: The Board of Public Works has been replaced by the Board of Selectmen.)
|
|
| Meeting Time/Place: |
July 18, 2001, 10:00 am
State Transportation Building
Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission
Conference Rooms 5 and 6 (tentative)
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116-3900
|
|
The Issue
In 1980, the state barred the enforcement of any ordinance regulating seaplane operations
on any Great Pond unless such an ordinance was first approved by the Massachusetts
Aeronautics Commission (MAC). Such approval was never sought by or granted to the town of
Wakefield for a 1975 town bylaw prohibiting seaplane operations on the lake - that is,
until today.
On July 18th, the MAC will meet for a final vote on whether to approve the Wakefield bylaw.
If the MAC votes to approve the bylaw, it will set a precedent by accepting the town's
arguments that safety and the right to quiet enjoyment will be compromised by allowing
seaplane operations on the lake - a precedent that could easily be used against the
seaplane community at any one of the 250 other Great Ponds in the state.
The Town of Wakefield contends that seaplanes should not be permitted to land on Lake Quannapowitt
for several reasons:
- Since powerboats are prohibited, seaplanes should also be prohibited.
This argument is not being opposed by SPA.
- Seaplane operations will distract drivers on local roadways, leading to accidents.
This argument is entirely speculative, has not been shown to have any basis in fact, and
puts excessive emphasis on the potential distraction of seaplane operations in comparision
to cell phone use, radios, passengers, road signs, and other driver distractions.
- Seaplane operations will put the lives of windsurfers, canoeists, crew teams, sailors,
fishermen, boaters, and pedestrians at risk.
This argument is again entirely speculative.
Over the 13-year period from 1983 to 1995, a study by SPA found only four accidents involving
seaplanes and persons or property outside of the seaplane. Two of those were minor, non-fatal
accidents. One was a pre-arranged rendevous. Two fatal accidents in a 13-year period
throughout the entire United States is evidence that seaplanes do not pose a significant
safety hazard.
- Seaplane operations will destroy the quiet, peaceful atmosphere of Lake Quannapowitt.
Lake
Quannapowitt is bordered by Routes 128 and 129, Main Street, Town Common, and North Avenue.
All of these are congested roadways with loud truck and motorcycle traffic.
The individual petitioning to use the lake intends to make no more than 10 takeoffs and landings
per year, each of which is estimated to produce no more than 2 minutes of noise above background
levels. Thus, at worst, the proposed operation would produce 20 minutes of noise per year, and
about 5 minutes of peak noise per year. Since there are no mooring facilities or attractions for
seaplane pilots on the lake, it is unlikely that the lake will be receive significant visitation by
other seaplanes. (It has been and continues to be listed in the Water Landing Directory as open.
The last reported visit was by an individual who performed three takeoffs and landings
approximately 4-5 years ago). It is hard to understand how 20 minutes per year of airplane noise
on a lake that is constantly inundated by traffic noise will significantly impact the "quiet,
peaceful" atmosphere of Lake Quannapowitt.
- Seaplane operations create the potential for further pollution of the lake.
Seaplanes have no prop in the water, do not port exhaust into the water, and do not
burn the oily gas mixtures required by two-stroke outboard motors. Any allegation that
10 seaplane takeoffs and landings per year will make a measurable impact on the pollution
of the lake is absurd.
If the MAC approves Wakefield's bylaw, it will tacitly validate the town's alarmist
and speculative reasoning. Such a precedent will open the door for other towns to
present the same arguments, and could seriously harm the MAC's ability to maintain
seaplane access to the state's Great Ponds.
|
|