Concord Journal
August 23, 2001

Massport unveils vegetation plan for Hanscom
By Barbara Forster, Correspondent

The public unveiling of Massport's plans to control vegetation at Hanscom
Field took place on Tuesday at the monthly meeting of the Hanscom Field
Advisory Commission in Bedford.

Commission Chairman Sheldon Moll of Bedford stressed that the presentation
to the commission was an overview. Details and more in-depth discussions,
along with extensive questions and answers, were reserved for two public
hearings scheduled at the Sheraton Hotel in Lexington on Aug. 28 and Sept.
13.

The vegetation management plan, which is raising more than eyebrows in
Bedford, Concord, Lexington and Lincoln, affects the ends of all four
runways at Hanscom. While much of the property involved belongs to Massport,
some sites are in Lexington and Lincoln. The Bedford Town Forest is the
largest piece of non-Massport land and is being handled separately.

The vegetation management plan focuses on plant growth in the approach zones
to the runways. Historically, some type of vegetation removal project takes
place at the field approximately every five years.

According to Massport's consultant for the project, Randall Christensen,
senior environmental scientist at Defresne-Henry of Portland, Maine, the
plan is a tool that provides Massport with a methodology to remove
vegetation in order to maintain aviation safety while complying with various
local, state and federal regulations. Still in draft status, the five-year
plan, which has been sent to town offices, conservation commissions and
libraries in the four Hanscom communities, includes longer term maintenance
procedures.

The goal, said Christensen, is to " to meet minimum safety standards and to
get the airport in compliance with regulations but to do it in an
environmentally sound manner and in compliance with other state regulations.

Currently a dozen vegetation management plans are in force throughout
Massachusetts, which has almost two dozen airports.

Work on the Hanscom plan stated in 1999 via aerial photography to collect
data on trees and other structures within the proscribed areas. After
identifying the protection zones - the runway approach categories, which can
be visual, instrument or precision and are defined by Federal Aviation
Administration regulations - the obstruction analysis that explains where
trees and other structures penetrate protected airspace was completed.
Christensen pointed out that the analysis must be made using existing
approach categories.

The categories affect the necessary amount of vegetation management. The
precision rating for Runway 29 means the approach is less steep than at
Runway 5, which has a visual rating. " That's how you minimize the amount of
vegetation that has to be cut, added Christensen. " Once the analysis is
completed, and you know what has to be removed, you look at the
environmental constraints. "

Wetlands, usually covered by local, state and federal regulations, are the
largest constraints but the list also includes rare species and historical
resources.

The next step is to determine what methods are available and how the
vegetation will be removed. Massport's choices includes standard mowing, cut
and chip, mowing-flail type, helicopter removal - the most expensive method
that is used in areas where four-wheel drive doesn't work - mechanized
felling, and clear and grub, a euphemism for clear-cutting.

Explaining that project location affects the removal choice, Christensen
stated that areas with dense shrubbery could become meadows; saplings would
also come down on these sites. The hay field on Virginia Road is very close
to the end of Runway 5 and even the shortest shrubs affect aviation
protection zones. The hay field, for example, will be expanded.

On the other hand, a specific management project for Runway 11 is far enough
away so that only the tallest trees will be removed.

Although the management plan addresses the entire airport, approximately 17
specific projects are identified. Where necessary, mitigation plans are also
project specific. Christensen also pointed out although this is an airport
wide plan, Massport is seeking approvals from all four conservation
commissions. " If we are denied (approval) the whole project is denied, " he
said. " But if don¹t get it from one town, we could do the work in the
others. "

The plan is based on several documents: the 1993 Vegetation Generic
Environmental Impact Report (GEIR) for public use airports, the 1999
Vegetation Generic Environmental Notification Form (GENF), and the
Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act regulations. Strictly for
informational purposes and in keeping with the guidance in these various
documents, a copy went off to the MEPA office on Aug. 15 and notice was in
the Aug. 22 edition of the Environmental Monitor.

Several people, urging a less aggressive approach, opposed the idea of
removing trees that were 10 feet below the safety area. Commission member
Sara Mattes of Lincoln argued that effective ongoing maintenance which is
proposed in the management plan could control tree growth, too.

While Christensen admitted that topping has been used in some vegetation
management plans, the procedure is very labor intensive and very short-term.

" Some trees, like pine trees, can't be topped or they'll die, " he said. "
In a forest situation, if you top trees you're left with a standing pole
because vegetation is only at the top 15 feet of the tree. "

Rapid regrowth, especially for white pine and red maple, which are
predominant species around Hanscom, is another problem. " Once you cut red
maple, it comes back with a vengeance and grows up to five feet a year, "
Christensen said.

The timeline is a bit loose. Massport wants public comments about the draft
plan by Sept. 24 in order to submit " notices of intent " to the four towns'
conservation commissions sometime in October.

However, during this period Massport is also working on new wetland
delineations for the vegetation management project. The commissions want the
new data either before or when they begin reviewing the draft plan


==========
**NOTICE:  In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========