Robert Kennedy shows a prototype drone under development by the nonprofit Tennessee Valley Stellar Corporation. He had removed the propellers and battery to make it easier to bring it inside and to avoid security and safety concerns about his intentions. He wanted to use it for show and tell, but was denied the opportunity to speak. Attendees were offered to dictate comments to a court recorder. Few were willing to stand in line and do so. Written comments may be sent until Aug. 18, 2023.  Wolf Naegeli/Hellbender Press

Public hearing on proposed Oak Ridge airport suggests there is no easy glide path for project

OAK RIDGE — Citizens of Oak Ridge and surrounding communities continue to debate the pros and cons of a new airport in the area. A public forum on Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2023, brought together those for and against the proposed airport to study documents and discuss the project.

While there was an opportunity to give verbal comments to a court reporter, many decided to put comments in writing. Additional comments can be submitted by Friday, Aug. 18 via mail to FAA Memphis District Office, 2600 Thousand Oaks Blvd., Suite 2250, Memphis or by email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

The city plans to construct a 5,000-foot runway, partial parallel taxiway, and associated facilities at a location north of U.S. 58 between Perimeter and Blair roads. It’s in the Heritage Center around the former K-25 site from the Manhattan Project era. 

The city of Oak Ridge government commissioned GMC to write an Environmental Assessment and the Federal Aviation Administration will review it, along with public comments to make decisions about moving forward with the airport construction. In a press release the city of Oak Ridge stated it organized the hearing to follow federal laws and policies. Other reasons for the meeting included issues such as “area wetland, streams, and ponds; archaeological and historical sites; biological issues; airport noise and social effects such as road closures and realignments; view shed and lighting impacts.”

The neighborhoods of The Preserve are a mere 1.5 mi away from the end of the proposed runway. Project location, scale and dimensions superimposed on this Google Earth snapshot are approximate; for illustration purposes only. Please ignore the eye altitude indicated. That value depends very much on the size of your screen. It gets updated only when viewing a scene in the live Google Earth app.  If you were sitting in an airplane — approaching the airport on the 3-degree glidepath shown here in yellow — you would pass barely more than 500 feet above these homes. During ascent (facing this point of view) many of the planes could already be higher above The Preserve, but because running their engines at full throttle, emissions would be more perceptible and concerning.

How would the airport project affect livability and property values?

OAK RIDGE — For the past three decades, the City of Oak Ridge has been complaining that most who get hired to work in Oak Ridge prefer to live in Knoxville or Farragut. Low population growth and few new home starts did not make up for increasing costs of city services. A considerable amount of city-budget increases, however, were a consequence of poor decisions, driven by wishful thinking. The payback of grandiose plans that had no solid economic foundation was measly, if not lacking for years and ever more years. The underutilized Parcel A Centennial Golf Course and Horizon Center are particularly memorable examples.

Some of our readers may also remember the scandal when DOE sold a strip of riverfront property near Brashear Island on the Clinch at a price of $54 per acre — drastically below fair market value. That  incidence was related in a roundabout way to another so-called “self-sufficiency parcel,” Parcel E. The latter was sold to the City in 1987 for transfer to the Boeing Company, which planned to build an industrial facility. The project never materialized.

City says it presently has little idea how to cover potential cost overruns and the public liability behind proposed Oak Ridge airport

OAK RIDGE — Opponents of a plan to build a 323-acre general aviation airport near the site of the former K-25 facility on the western side of the Oak Ridge Reservation have voiced ample environmental concerns, but many also have economic-related questions about the $55 million project originally priced in 2016.

Meanwhile, UT-Battelle, which manages Oak Ridge National Laboratory, provided a statement fully endorsing the project, while the National Park Service said it would closely review the proposed airport’s effect on components of the Manhattan Project National Historical Park.

“The planned airport project at the East Tennessee Technology Park is an essential component in the future economic growth of the region and an important feature for potential business development. Many businesses or projects that could be positively impacted by the construction of the airport have ongoing research partnerships with Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which is managed for the US Department of Energy by UT-Battelle, LLC,” according to a statement from UT-Battelle.

In perhaps a bit of contrast, the National Park Service said it would investigate the potential impact of the proposed airport on national park assets, including a visitors center and interpretive facilities centered around the K-25 site in question.

“The National Park Service has a responsibility to ensure protection of cultural resources significant at the local, state, and national levels. Resource impacts should be considered in their cultural contexts and managed in light of their values. The NPS is reviewing the document to better understand effects and impacts of the proposal,” according to a statement from Niki Stephanie Nicholas, the site manager for the Manhattan Project National Historical Site.

That statement was issued Monday. A full public hearing on the proposal will commence at 6 p.m. today (Aug. 8) at the DoubleTree Hotel on Illinois Avenue in Oak Ridge.

The original story continues below:

While Advocates for the Oak Ridge Reservation (AFORR) has warned of ecological damage to wetlands, woodlands and wildlife in the current proposed airport footprint (and some plans call for the rerouting of Oak Ridge Turnpike adjacent to the site), another citizen group feels the project will lead to another city boondoggle propped up by taxpayers.

Grants from the Department of Energy, Tennessee Department of Transportation, Appalachian Regional Commission, and other external sources will fund construction of the 5,000-foot runway, apron, and hangars planned for the Heritage Center in west Oak Ridge. Half of the stated cost would go toward extensive grading work that would erase wetlands and fill a remediated pond on the property that is adored by birdwatchers. Several concepts also call for the rerouting of the western end of Oak Ridge Turnpike.

The City of Oak Ridge would be fiscally obligated by contract with the Federal Aviation Administration to keep the airport fully operational for a minimum of 20 years upon accepting federal grant funding for its construction. There also would be a risk of potentially very high liability cost in case of an accident, should the City be found negligent in fulfilling its obligations.

Runway centerline (red) of proposed Oak Ridge Airport at Heritage Center. P1 Pond, a certified habitat for rare birds would be filled in. Planes would pass very close by the George Jones Memorial Baptist Church as well as the former K-25/East Tennessee Technology Park Visitors Overlook and the slave cemetery. Public greenways & trails are shown in purple.

Desperate necessity or boondoggle in the making?

OAK RIDGE — The City of Oak Ridge will conduct a public hearing at the Double Tree Hotel, August 8, 2023 from 6 to 8 P.M. EDT on the Oak Ridge Airport Environmental Assessment, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The Foundation for Global Sustainability (FGS) believes that a full environmental impact statement would be required under NEPA if the City of Oak Ridge wants to use Federal funding to build an airport here. The provided Environmental Assessment is mistaken in declaring that the project will have “no significant impact.”

Please check back here often as we will update this article with more information on important issues over the coming week.

Comments submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration by Advocates for the Oak Ridge Reservation

(Updated: Inadvertently we had included bullet points from a draft of the expanded and mailed letter.)

AFORR recognizes general aviation (GA) airports are a big part of the US national economy and understands that they can be justified for a local economy. However, in the specific instance of a proposed GA airport in Oak Ridge, we believe there are no compelling merits, needs, or justifications for such an airport. The following points support our position that the development of an Oak Ridge airport is not warranted or needed.

— There is no defensible need for the airport. Oak Ridge has convenient access to three modern airports serving general aviation — DKX, RKW, & TYS. The proposed airport location in Oak Ridge does not meet one of the key FAA entry criteria for a new GA airport. It is a 25-minute ground travel time from the proposed Oak Ridge airport site to the Rockwood Municipal Airport (RKW). FAA Order5090.3C Chapter 2 Entry Criteria requires a new GA airport to be 30 minutes or more average ground travel time from the nearest airport under the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.

ASHEVILLE — An alliance of conservation groups notified the U.S. Forest Service of its intent to sue the federal department unless officials fix what it calls glaring deficiencies in the Nantahala-Pisgah Forest Plan.

Potential plaintiffs allege the Forest Service’s management plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah national forests is flawed. They maintain the Forest Service plan favors commercial logging, ignores the best science available, and puts several endangered bat species at risk of extinction. 

The endangered species potentially affected are the northern long-eared bat, Indiana bat, Virginia big-eared bat, and the gray bat. Two species that are being considered for the endangered species list — the little brown bat and the tricolored bat — would also be adversely affected.

MountainTrue, its lawyers at the Southern Environmental Law Center, and coalition partners — the Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Defenders of Wildlife, and Center for Biological Diversity — sent a 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue (NOI), which is a prerequisite to filing a lawsuit under the Endangered Species Act. The letter alleges the Forest Service relied on inaccurate and incomplete information during the planning process, resulting in a plan that imperils endangered wildlife.