Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFlying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission - 07/09/2020APPROVED MINUTES FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION THURSDAY, JULY 9, 2020 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER 8080 MITCHELL RD COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chair: Bob Barker Vice Chair: Daniel Dorson Commissioners: Keith Tschohl Andy Kleinfehn (National Guard) Dave Rosa Kurt Schendel (Business Representative) STUDENT MEMBERS: COMMISSION STAFF: Scott Gerber, EP Fire Chief Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary MAC STAFF: Blaine Peterson (Airport Manager) Jennifer Lewis I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent was commission member Dave Rosa. Brad Joffer and Braj Agrawal of MAC, Joe Harris of the League of Airports, and Laura Herrmann, Flying Cloud private pilot, joined the meeting. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Tschohl moved, seconded by Schendel to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. III. COVID-19 UPDATES Gerber welcomed everyone back and explained the social distancing and cleaning guidelines. Barker asked for airport related impact. Gerber replied from March to June pulled back airport inspections, but still did building inspections. Effective June 1 inspectors would be back in the field. Schendel stated a pilot with Inflight was recently diagnosed and was in quarantine. Discussion followed on the pattern flight since Covid- 19. Lewis stated the activity was busy. IV. WELCOME TO NEW COMMISSION MEMBERS FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 2 Barker welcomed Kleinfehn, who introduced himself. Dave Rosa was ill and could not attend. The commission members introduced themselves. V. PUBLIC COMMENTS VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Tschohl moved, seconded by Schendel to approve the minutes of the January 7, 2020 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. VII. STANDING DISCUSSION ITEMS A. NOISE REPORT - MAC Lewis presented the noise report for the second quarter of 2020, which showed how Flying Cloud fit within the MAC system of flight operations. The Flying Cloud airport generated 34.7 percent of operations and 88.4 percent of complaints in the MAC Reliver system. The details were best viewed online at Macnoise.com under Interactive reports. There had been a significant increase in noise complaints for the second quarter: 7593 in 2020, 1101 at nighttime; 1186 in 2019, 346 at nighttime. 25 households complained in 2020, and 41 households complained in 2019. Lewis displayed the breakout of monthly totals graph. Complaints were higher in February through June compared to the past three years, perhaps due to people staying home more during this time. She stated MAC took a deeper dive into the information to see what might be contributing to these differences: There were 12 new households in 2020 showing complaints, and starting in May he number of complaints rose, perhaps corresponding with residents being outside more and flights picking up as shown in the monthly graph of operations. Aircraft types that generate complaints were consistent. The ratio of operations per complaint was 2.3 compared to 16.5 in 2019. In short, MAC was seeing more complaints from a limited number of households, and receiving 2 nighttime complaints per operation, as compared to three in 2019. The aircraft type correlated with complaints was ranked as follows: Piston Jet Turboprop Unknown had grown: 49.9 in 2019, and 4.4 so far in 2020 Helicopter FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 3 Barker asked how Flying Cloud versus MSP was delineated. Lewis replied the processing took into account the airport being reported and the algorithm had more point to it to make it more accurate. Barker asked for and received confirmation the unknown factors were decreasing and the report showed a more confident correlation with Flying Cloud. Peterson reported there were significant storm events in 2019 which had an impact on operations, but there were none of those this year. January had rough storms, February showed a mild increase in traffic, and March showed a decrease in operations. Corporate traffic halted. There was an increase in April and May, and in June normal operations resumed. Barker noted the discussions online contradict the anecdotal stories that more planes were flying over households. Peterson agreed and said the traffic had actually decreased in terms of straight percentage. The surge in complaints was largely driven by piston engines, perhaps due to new students, circling. Tschohl asked if the three households which had generated 93 percent of the complaints were new. Lewis replied top complaint locations were not new households. Two were near Bearpath and one near Olympic Hills, and two of three of them bumped up number of complaints. Barker asked if they had been spoken to personally. Lewis replied she had spoken to two households and made an attempt at the third. One household has been in the top three in complaints and dropped down to the top five. Lewis stated she had been with MAC 11 years and heard complaints from one particular household for ten years. Another household ramped up complaints last year and this year and had been spoken to many times. The third household was fairly new, and she reached out to every single household who had complained in 2019 no matter what airport they complained about. Lewis stated she did not get a lot of responses, and none of the three top households responded. Barker asked if it was possible to have an automated response. Lewis replied that process had been changed to require one to create an account, making it easier to have a login instead of retyping one’s address. Discussion followed on the convenience of this. Lewis stated more residents were at home and everyone had to realize what is now “normal.” She was particularly concerned with activity on the north runway, which now seemed to be causing traffic to be easing into the neighborhood north and west and northeast of Flying Cloud. Barker surmised this was consistent with pistons doing pattern work. Lewis replied sometimes the traffic pattern was wider than it used to be, enough for residents to notice. Peterson suggested get more separation between younger pilots to avoid saturation. Dorson asked if there was a possibility to have piston traffic training at other fields (airports). Peterson agreed. Peterson and Lewis were meeting with chief instructors at Flying Cloud. Dorson suggested doing things differently this summer, considering more people were at FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 4 home. Discussion followed on the results. Lewis stated not everyone who called in wished to file a complaint. B. ORDINANCE 97 MONITORING – MAC Peterson stated there had not been a lot for the second quarter, only two, and no repeat offenders. There were five in the first quarter with one repeat offender. All had been a repeat offender in the past. There were no responses to the letters. Dorson suggested forbidding offenders to land a plane at Flying Cloud. Peterson replied he was still handling those conversation. C. AIRPORT INCIDENTS AND OPERATIONAL UPDATES – MAC Peterson no airport incidents other than two weeks ago on Friday night, when young kids got inside the gates. Apparently, a grandson of one of the attendants had the gate code and allowed some to enter, and eventually 12 vehicles entered including cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks. They used the taxiway as race strip. Eden Prairie Police responded, but somehow the kids were alerted and left. The police chased down and arrested one and questioned two individuals. The ringleader not yet identified. One car went into Scott County, crashed and was impounded. The air traffic control tower was closed, and thankfully there was no damage. The camera caught images of the vehicles but no license plates. The investigation was ongoing. Baker noted there were some gate malfunctions in the past and asked if there was a correlation. Peterson replied there were no takeaways in terms of security or signage. The airport was changing the controls to the gates. It used a cellular network at present; previously it was hard-wired. Kleinfehn asked how often the code was changed, and Peterson replied it was every three years. Barker noted there was a ripple effect with communications whenever a code was changed. Peterson added it could be inconvenient for any tenant or subtenant of a hangar. He was working to change the controls to the gates to be fully cellular. A proximity card was also an option. Joe Harris asked what caused the delay for this, and Peterson replied he was working on the cellular network, which had been delayed by Covid-19. Discussion followed on various security measured at small airports around Minnesota. Peterson estimated the proximity cards would be in place in 2021. Tschohl suggested amending the fence line to provide better access elsewhere. Peterson agreed this would be an improvement but it could not be implemented as of yet. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 5 D. PRIMARY RELIEVER AIRPORTS VISIONARY STUDY - MAC Peterson stated he was messaging to the pilots to fly friendly. He had sat down with one flight instructor school and had a conversation about scattering operations, which was well-received. By the end of the month he would have reached all flight instructor schools. There was a new school starting up (ATP) and he would reach out to that instructor as well. It had eight aircraft of the 800 series and 12 students who were not flying yet. The fight instructor had just arrived the day before. Dorsen suggested this was a good time to have a conversation with training operations, and Barker and Peterson agreed. Peterson said there would be signage to direct students to right locations. Dorsen asked if this would be inside the gate, and Peterson replied it would inside and outside. Barker noted there was demand for training at Flying Cloud even during the time of the coronavirus. Herman asked for the flight time for the ATP school, and Peterson replied it would be running by October. He added he wished to reach out to high school students and had scheduled a meeting with Eden Prairie superintendent Josh Swanson to visit Eden Prairie High School next year. Schendel announced there were Saturday seminars at Flying Cloud; the last one was held March 14, but Laura Herrmann had arranged webinars instead. Herrmann added she was searching for a larger webinar room and would be holding these for another six months. Schendel stated one of the topics was noise and alternatives for mitigating it, such as approaching flight schools. Herman stated it was possible to have online pilot meetings too. Lewis stated being creative in the situation would allow to tie in more content, such as new tower manager training and this commission’s participation. Also, a partnership with the FAA to bring in Alex Gertz as a speaker was a possibility, perhaps in September. Dorsen stated if something that worked could be done virtually, that was a good option, and he invited Hermann to ask the commission for its help if she needed it. Hermann replied there were new participants and the webinars were well- attended (60-90 participants, similar to the in-person seminars). People from all over the country were signing up. Lewis added these numbers in addition to the outreach for flight schools and flight instruction. VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. AIRPORT TOUR Discussion followed on the ability to hold a tour. Gerber noted a good time was when the commission had student members. Peterson added the control tower was closed at present and he had no date for reopening. It might not be decided until FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 6 the new supervisor came onsite. Tschohl suggested tabling the tour again until at least October in order to include student representatives. Barker agreed. B. REVIEW OF OTHER PAST EVENTS I. PRESENTATION TO MAC – JANUARY 21, 2020 Barker stated he and Tschohl attended and Tschohl gave the presentation. Tschohl stated it was very well received. Tschohl had provided an overview of the commission, a history of the airport, highlighted changes, spoke on the growth of the community and on airport business operations, and explained how the resurgence of traffic after the recession in 2008 created new friction. There were good collaborations between the City, MAC, and the Zoning Board to build up the viewing area and host public events and pilot briefings. Focus areas were growth in operations noticed by the community, voluntary noise abatement, and identifying opportunities for incremental improvement. There were surprising outliers of aircraft types that generated the number of complaints. A generic operation in 2019 had a one in 30 chance of generating a complaint (roughly three percent), but three types of aircraft were over five times more likely to generate complaints, and none were particularly large. The top 10 list was: King Air 200 (twin turboprop) Beech Jet Air Commander 50 (piston) The only thing these aircraft had in common was two engines. The question was what was specific to these designs that could generate complaints, or if noise was due to their being not as well-performing as newer, larger jets, or if the time of day made a difference. This would be a deep-dive research project. Barker replied it would be fascinating to find a trend. II. MAC PRESENTATION TO THE EP CITY COUNCIL – JANUARY 21, 2020 Tschohl stated this was a general overview of what the commission does, its general goals based on charter, and its accomplishments in 2019. Barker added the presentation also provided background for the new members of the Council. Tschohl added the Final Four was held at Flying Cloud Airport in 2019, which was a large event. Also, the first open house had been held. Changes in drone regulations affected the airport. Goals for FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 7 2020 included the visioning study, drone regulations, and ongoing developments in noise abatement. Barker stated his takeaway was the commission could do a better job education at various levels as to the airports impact and history, and what it meant to have an airport in the community. He urged more frequent outreach. Tschohl noted there were questions as to why it was so difficult to measure and mitigate noise, and the technology existed to analyze noise profile, but the officials needed further education as to what this was. Barker agreed noise measurement and modeling was a topic that required more outreach and communication. IX. NEW BUSINESS X. UPCOMING EVENTS AND TOPICS FOR FUTURE FCAAC MEETINGS A. MAC FLIGHT TRACKER TUTORIAL Tschohl suggested the commission table this in order to have students and public members present. Barker agreed. B. OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY NOISE MEASUREMENT AND MODELING METHODS a. Overview of Community noise measurement and modeling methods Lewis stated awareness was key, building the proper expectations, goals and objectives. There was strong interest by the commission and Eden Prairie City Council to know the current level of aircraft sound generation by Flying Cloud aircraft. The study was a priority and would be conducted internally. The scope of the study included only Flying Cloud aircraft coming to and leaving Flying Cloud airport. This data would be compared to modeling data. Data gathering involved placing devices around the area and following a prescribed process provided by the FAA. The study would not include changes to FAA aircraft operating procedures, would not provide data for every aircraft, and would not provide data for aircraft not at Flying Cloud. Lewis displayed for the commission an image of measuring equipment (microphone) for field study. The study would commence in July and last about a month. She expected to return to the commission with results in October. Barker asked how it could be determined data on typical operations would be captured. Lewis replied the best chance to capture the most data was when the airport was busy. Staff also knew the traffic patterns, however there was a chance for atypical behavior. This was intended to be a snapshot. If the data showed anything truly abnormal, staff would confer about next steps. The field measurements plus the modeling would weed out adverse weather, terrain and FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 9, 2020 Page 8 other anomalies. This study was not meant for a long-term analysis, but a snapshot in time and adjust for extremes. The goal was to capture as much data as possible. It would take a significant weather pattern or a runway closure, et cetera, to contribute to atypical data. Lewis explained the locations of the microphones to best capture data on traffic patterns, mid-air turns, arrivals, and departures. She displayed a map to the commission and explained the location of the measuring devices and the patterns they would capture. The modeling too used would be an FAA-approved AADT model with 15 analysis points. Evenly spaced grid points would comprise the analysis locations, and these outnumbered the field devices. Noise over 65 decibels (the FAA- recognized threshold) would be captured along with the time above this threshold. These standards followed the strengths utilized in the FAA standards. Observations of equipment would be conducted daily to ensure it was functioning properly, and the equipment was FAA-certified. XI. ADJOURNMENT The next FCAAC meeting will be held on Monday, October 8, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. in Heritage Room I. MOTION: Dorson moved, seconded by Schendel to adjourn. Motion carried 8-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.