Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFlying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission - 06/12/2008 - Other APPROVED MINUTES FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION INFORMATIONAL MEETING THURSDAY,JUNE 12, 2008 7:00 P.M. HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE Auditorium 13100 College View Drive COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Rick King, Vice-Chair Jeff Larsen, Commissioners: Judy Gentry, Joe Harris, Greg McKewan, Mark Michelson and Kurt Schendel COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None MAC REPRESENTATIVES: Bridget Rief, Assistant Director of Airport Development Chad Leqve, Manager, Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs STAFF: Scott Kipp, Senior Planner Carol Pelzel, City Recorder I. WELCOME, PURPOSE AND PROCESS Chair King called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chair King welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending this meeting. He explained that this is an informational meeting about Flying Cloud Airport. He also explained that he is the Chair of the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and that the Commission is appointed by the City Council. The Commission consists of seven members including business people, residents and MAC representatives. King reported that Commission members serve on the Commission for various terms and new people are welcomed to serve on the Commission when openings become available and suggested that if anyone is interested in serving on the Commission they apply when the City is accepting applications. King also pointed out that this meeting is being video taped. King introduced Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) representatives Bridget Rief and Chad Leqve as well as Joe Harris who also serves on the Airport Advisory Commission. He also introduced the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and City staff. He explained that the question has been raised as to why they are having this meeting now after the expansion has been approved. MAC will proceed with the construction but before they started construction they wanted to be able to tell the Eden Prairie residents about the expansion so that they understand what it is and to give them the opportunity to ask questions. King further explained that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a Record of Decision for the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) for this project prepared by MAC. MAC is a governmental entity created by the State Legislature and FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 2 consists of six reliever airports and the MSP airport. MAC commission members are appointed by the Governor with one appointment by the Mayor of Minneapolis and one by the Mayor of St. Paul. MAC is a totally separate entity from the City of Eden Prairie and owns Flying Cloud Airport and property and has since 1948. A final agreement was negotiated between the City and MAC and both parties abided by that negotiated agreement. King reiterated that the purpose of this meeting is to get information to the residents about what is going to happen at the airport. They are not here to change people's views. It is an informational meeting only. The Commission welcomes suggestions for both MAC and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. II. AIRPORT PLANS; LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Joe Harris, Flying Cloud Airport Manager, explained that MAC is a public organization and is the third largest aviation system in the country and is operated for public use. The Chairperson of MAC is appointed by the Governor and the Commissioners serve four-year terms. Harris urged members of the audience to visit their website at www.mspairport.com for additional information. Harris stated that plans for improvements to Flying Cloud have been underway for nearly two decades. Flying Cloud is one of three reliever airports in the system and is an alternative for private and corporate flights to relieve traffic congestion at MSP. As demand for general aviation aircraft increases, Flying Cloud will play an important role in the regions overall transportation scene. Flying Cloud is a valuable resource and because of the vibrant community and business sector growth is encouraged. Flying Cloud is the base for various activities including public services, weather and traffic reporting, news gathering, pilot training and education and jobs. Harris said that the future of general aviation airports will become critical as the nation's airports strive to meet demands. Flying Cloud will play an important role in keeping non-commercial aircraft away from MSP and corporate aviation is strong. Harris reported that a 2005 economic study found that Flying Cloud Airport generates more than $80 million in economic activity with $39 million from airport business, $29 million of spending in the area by visitors and $12 million from airport operations. That study also estimates that over 700 jobs are generated in the area as a result of the airport. Last year the airport had 117,000 operations and is the home to 380 based aircraft. According to Hennepin County, nearly $600,000 is generated in personal property taxes collected from airport users. Harris stated that MAC participates and works with the Flying Cloud Airport Commission and leases property to the City for athletic fields, garden areas, a compost area and has developed relationships with the City's safety personnel. The Airport is also active with local organizations and members of the commercial aviation businesses are dedicated to meeting the needs of their customers and in partnering with the community. Bridget Rief, MAC Assistant Director of Airport Development, said she would like to review with the audience the actual development and expansion that will be taking place at FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 3 Flying Cloud Airport. She said she would also like to review the Agreement between MAC and the City, discuss the projects to be done and the schedule for those projects and to talk about the long-term Comprehensive Plan. Rief reported that in December, 2002, the City and MAC signed a Memorandum of Agreement. This Agreement is one of two key agreements between these two agencies. One of which deals with noise issues while the second agreement provides benefits for the City and MAC including new roadways and road improvements. These improvements did benefit the residents of Eden Prairie. The Memorandum of Agreement also included sewer and water extensions at the Airport. The City constructed a new material storage building across the road from the Airport and MAC also provided land to the City for storm water ponding with the ponds located on airport property. Rief further reported that the City has athletic fields located on approximately 31 acres of MAC property and the Agreement provides for the expansion of an additional 25 acres for park use to be located west of Eden Prairie Road. Rief pointed out that all of this benefits the City and MAC and most of the Agreement pieces have been completed or are in the process of being completed. Rief reviewed with the audience the projects that will be undertaken at Flying Cloud Airport including the north parallel runway extension from 3,600 feet to 3,900 feet. She reported that the south parallel runway will be extended to 5,000 feet and explained that State law prohibits an airport of this size to have a runway longer than 5,000 feet. They will also be shifting the runway by 120 feet and will be widening it from 75 feet to 100 feet. Rief stated that some of the hangars will be removed prior to opening the 5,000 foot runway and they are looking to construct a south hangar area. To best utilize their property, they are also looking at relocating the existing traffic control tower and have begun discussions with the FAA. A potential location for the tower would be near the new hangars and south of the building area. Rief explained that the north parallel runway construction is scheduled to begin in August and the sanitary sewer and water project will be started in a week or two. The south parallel runway will be closed in 2009 for construction and that project should be completed by the end of 2009. Construction of the south hangar area will begin in 2009 and should be completed some time in 2009 but could be carried over to 2010. Rief stated that they are also looking at relocating the VOR navigation system and placing that out on the approach to the runways. This may occur some time this summer. Rief reported that MAC typically adopts a 20-year Long-Term Comprehensive Plan with updates occurring every five years. They are currently in the process of updating that plan for all six reliever airports. Flying Cloud Airport's plan will assume that the projects they are talking about this evening will be completed or in place and will not be identified in the plan. In developing the plans they look at what the facility needs and what the users of this facility should have in order to run a successful operation. Rief said she expects that there will be some identification of hangar areas out in about 10 or 20 years along with some security improvements. The Flying Cloud Airport Commission will be involved in MAC's FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 4 Comprehensive Plan process as well as the City. By the end of the year they hope to have a draft document published and open for public comment. III. ON-GOING EFFORTS TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY CONCERNS Chad Leqve, Manager, MAC Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs, explained that the planning process and the cooperative discussions such as this evening's meeting has been going on for ten years and brings them to the point where they are right now. Leqve said he wanted to stress that the intent of this evening's meeting is to provide information and to answer questions and to hear any suggestions or recommendations the audience may have. Leqve said he would like to provide the audience with a little background on the operation of a public use airport and to discuss what MAC has implemented as it relates to the noise abatement program and to reaffirm that they are doing the best they can to address residents' concerns. Leqve presented a brief overview of Federal policy as it relates to airport operations and of the Agreement between MAC and the City as it relates to noise abatement. The Federal Policy Act was passed by Congress in 1990. Prior to this Act, there were many operation provisions to deal with noise issues in an airport environment. As a result of this Act, mandates were instituted with regard to aircraft operations and dealing with various noise concerns around airports became very limited. There are certain provisions that go with the receipt of Federal Funds. This requires that they be creative in the way they address noise issues. One of the methods they are trying to use at Flying Cloud Airport is the voluntary restriction. Since 1978, any aircraft over 20,000 pounds cannot operate at the airport. In 2000 the FAA indicated a concern about this restriction and also indicated that this was arbitrary and is an undue burden on commerce. The FAA stated that this is something that MAC has to deal with or their funding would be affected. Leqve explained that MAC entered into discussions with the City to see how they could work together to deal with this issue and with existing concerns. In 2001 and 2002 they negotiated an agreement with the City to amend Ordinance 51 and increased the weight restriction from 20,000 pounds to 60,000 pounds. They also prohibited run-up operations between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. and agreed to a series of airport use and development provisions. They also agreed to the nature of the use of the airport. Leqve explained that City and MAC staff developed an Operation Implementation Plan. This Plan includes a letter of intent to all operators to adhere to the noise abatement plans. This includes voluntary nighttime restrictions and voluntary Stage 2 restrictions as well as departure and arrival procedures. An investigation follow-up procedure and pilot education program was also developed. Leqve reviewed with the audience the voluntary nighttime operation restrictions explaining that they have put together voluntary programs and they have had meetings with tenants and pilots to alert them to this program. Since 2004, Flying Cloud has not had any Stage 2 operations. He stated that they have arrival and departure procedures including traffic pattern procedures, nighttime procedures and run-up procedures. They also have an FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 5 extensive noise investigation process. Every complaint received is investigated and they use a variety of tools to investigate those complaints including meter radio frequencies at the airport. When they confirm that a complaint is inconsistent with the voluntary provision a letter is sent to the operator explaining the voluntary abatement. Leqve stated that this is not a 100 percent effective means of dealing with the violations but they are trying to do the best possible job they can in educating the operators and making them aware of the resident's concerns. The FAA does not allow MAC to tell an operator they cannot fly at a certain time. Leqve said they will continue to monitor the complaints in coordination with the Flying Cloud Airport Commission. He said MAC relies on their website and will communicate with the complainants through their website. To date they have sent out over 450 letters to operators as a result of complaints received. Leqve reported that they also try to garner teamwork and cooperation from the tenants through pilot briefings. They relay the communities' concerns to the operators and try to get them to work with them on strategies to reduce the noise impact. Leqve explained that noise monitoring provisions were also included in the agreement. They agreed to, as part of the EIS done for the expansion, develop noise contours. MAC agreed to look at homes further out in the community to make sure they get a sample of homes that are representative of the total body of homes in the 60 to 64 contour and to test those houses to make sure the noise level is within the appropriate decibels. Leqve stated that as shown this evening by their attendance at this meeting, MAC is making additional efforts to work with the community and the City. They worked with the Airports Commission to develop an alternate route for helicopters to reduce the impact of helicopter noise to the residents and this has been somewhat effective. Leqve said they have also developed an interactive website for residents to use in filing noise complaints with MAC. This website development was a result of the Agreement between the City and MAC and there are a host of other internet resources available to the general public. Leqve said they are open to any suggestions and/or recommendations the audience may have in helping them to better work with the community. IV. MODERATED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS King explained that the Airport Advisory Commission worked with the City and MAC to advertise this meeting and sent out 3,800 postcards to residents within a one-mile radius of the airport. They also worked with the two local newspapers to advertise this hearing. The Mayor and City Council endorsed this meeting so that information could be provided to the public for their consideration. Stacy Desai, 11741 Tanglewood Drive, thanked the people who wrote letters to the editor to let her know when this meeting was going to be held. She said she would like to hear about the airport being an eyesore and how MAC is following the guidelines they are to operate under. They have indicated that they don't have the resources to track incoming and outgoing flights so Desai questioned how they are holding themselves accountable to their own guidelines. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 6 Harris responded that the airport is tired and they are working with the tenants to make improvements to the hangar structures at the airport. Some of the projects discussed this evening will get MAC to improve the airport. They are are looking at a hangar redevelopment plan for the future. Leqve stated that they have voluntary measures at the airport but there are still operations that occur during the nighttime hours. Desai said that if they have a full system to track those flights, how do they make sure they are following through with the guidelines. Leqve explained that what they are using for the flight tracking data is a system that is in place at MSP and there are line of sight issues and data integrity issues that exist when they are 12 miles away. They also use radio frequency information. At the last Airport Advisory Commission meeting discussion was held regarding an upgrade to the flight tracking data system at MSP and the Airport Commission requested that this upgrade include Flying Cloud Airport. This system would allow them to add sensors and the flight track data would be available on the internet with the integrity and accuracy that they would have at MSP. King reported that he did receive communication from the Executive Director of MAC that they have agreed to have Flying Cloud Airport part of the first phase implementation of the upgraded flight tracking system at MSP. Wayne Winstead, a resident on Spencer Sweet Pea Lane, said he was particularly concerned about the altitude of planes taking off from Flying Cloud. He asked if MAC or the FAA monitors the altitude of these older aircraft. Also, when letters are sent to operators is there any punishment or penalty for them violating the voluntary restriction. Winstead said he was also concerned that there were four Police officers in attendance at this meeting. King responded that Police and Fire are in attendance because they are integral to the operation of the airport and they worked with the Commission on the security of the airport. King said they wanted to have them here in case there were questions regarding airport security. Leqve said he would like to meet with Winstead after the meeting to give him the telephone number to call anytime a plane flies over that he feels is flying too low. They should be able to tell him how high the aircraft is. Leqve also stated that MAC does not have jurisdiction over the altitude of an airplane but that is under the FAA's jurisdiction. They can tell him what happened as far as the altitude and if the plane is in violation. Warren McVey, Manager of the Air Traffic Control Tower at Flying Cloud Airport, said he is attending this meeting as an observer and did not intend to speak at the meeting but did state that they control the airplanes and they do it completely within government guidelines. McVey said they try to get the planes to turn to the south over the river bottoms but they cannot always be sent that way. The airplanes that are flying lower are older FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 7 airplanes and it takes them longer to get up. McVey said they are trying to be good neighbors and are trying to send the planes to the south. With regard to the question about whether or not violators are punished or fined when not following the voluntary restriction, Leqve explained that they do not have the authority to fine or punish someone who does not follow the restriction. If the operator is following Federal regulations they cannot be fined. Leqve said they are doing the best job they can by continuing dialogue with the operators to make them aware of the issues. Curt Iverson, an Eden Prairie resident, asked why they don't go past the FAA to whoever governs them stating that they need special rules around reliever airports. He asked why they haven't done that and why they don't do it. This reliever airport should have rules that do not allow operators to fly between certain hours. Given that the airlines are cutting back flights he questioned why there is a need to expand hangar space here. He suggested that they do this at Anoka where they want it. Eden Prairie residents do not want the expansion at Flying Cloud. King explained that the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission receives its instructions from the City. They have a signed agreement that says they will not stand in the way of the airport expansion. There is nothing in their charter allowing them to do anything about the expansion. Leqve stated that MAC does have a responsibility to be responsible neighbors but they also have a very big responsibility to the air transportation business and the metropolitan area and people who use the airports. MAC has the responsibility to maintain the airports. Leqve also pointed out that the FAA funds the airport operation. Iverson asked why they don't ask the FAA to limit the take off times for Flying Cloud. He suggested that they talk to them about making the restriction mandatory. Leqve said there has to be a balance for both the residents and the operators. King said they all have the opportunity to talk to their Congressional representatives. The FAA would be more responsive to Congress and that is a good way for the citizens to express some of their opinions. Terry Sullivan, 10272 Winter Place, said he would like a clarification of why the 60,000 pound limit was changed and he asked if they could be Stage 2 airplanes. Leqve said they had to be Stage 3 but Stage 2 could land at the airport. Sullivan said that if there is too much noise at his office and someone complains, the City will ask him to stop whatever he is doing to make the noise. He questioned why it should be different for the airport. Sullivan also asked if anyone on the Commission knows of any of the businesses currently operating at this airport with 60,000 pound airplanes. Perhaps if the residents knew who these operators were they would not deal with them. King pointed out that the 60,000 pound limit has been in effect since the agreement was signed. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 8 Schendel said he has a business at the airport but does not know which businesses have 60,000 pound airplanes. He explained that 60,000 pounds is the maximum allowed and that number cannot be exceeded. Corporate aircrafts range from 10,000 to 60,000 pounds and there are a lot of options. King explained that the Commission does not see names of the people who file complaints or who the letters are sent to. The data is private and is protected under the Data Privacy Act. Sullivan did point out that whatever they did with regards to the helicopter operations has helped. With regard to the question of why the expansion isn't done at Anoka rather than Flying Cloud, Rief explained that the EIS addresses the needs for Flying Cloud Airport and the Record of Decision and that document is available on the City's website. She stated that they are here tonight to give the audience information on the projects and not to debate the need. Rob Hiller, 12701 Stoneyway, said he believes MAC is doing a good job based on the place they are in and that they are trying. He does believe their hands are tied. He also believes that the suggestion that they contact the FAA about restricting flight times is a good suggestion. At 6:40 p.m. this evening a jet flew over his home and it was very loud. Hiller said he has called the airport at night when the airplanes come in close or low and has never received any communication back from MAC. He is not sure the communication loop is a good one. Hiller said there is a safety issue with the jets flying low and the community is expressing a need to take this another step further. Hiller asked if there are plans to charge landing fees. Harris explained that revenue is collected from those who own a business at the airport or hangars. There is an annual ground lease fee and they take a percentage of the total gross business receipts. These charges are in lieu of a landing fee. Hiller said they could discourage operators from flying during the restricted hours by charging them some kind of fee but he is not sure if this is possible or not. Doug Bushard, a resident on Riverview Road, asked if they have taken into consideration the decrease in tax base to the homeowners because of the airport expansion. He indicated that he is ready to join in a lawsuit against the City for loss of property value. An unidentified member of the audience referred to the June 12 issue of the Sun Current stating that this meeting had already been held. King explained that all of the information given to the newspapers was given ahead of the meeting dates and those dates have never changed. The date of this meeting was published on the City's website and posted at City Hall. Postcards were mailed to 3,800 residents well in advance of the meeting and the correct information was provided to the newspapers. They did everything possible to advertise this meeting. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 9 An unidentified member of the audience said he resents the fact that MAC can do whatever they want without the permission of Eden Prairie. He asked why they relied on resident complaints about flyovers rather than have a full-time employee monitoring this. The original Memorandum of Understanding states that airplanes are not to fly over residential areas. They are suppose to fly over the river. King responded that control of the airplanes is not in the hands of MAC. Also, the Agreement does not say planes cannot fly over residential areas. There are noise abatement procedures that apply to pilots and generally they try to fly those procedures. The resident said they have to live here and he asked if they have a plan to deal with the depreciation of property values and he asked if there is a plan to deal with noise abatement. King explained that MAC will do noise monitoring after the project is completed. They do some level of mitigation depending on location and type of housing in Minneapolis. However, he does not believe that is the way it will happen in Eden Prairie. They don't know and MAC will have to deal with that. Also, King stated that the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission has no plan for dealing with property value depreciation nor does MAC have a plan. Ray Lamola said he agrees that the airport needs to be fixed up and stated that it appears that there have been many laborious cost studies done on the airport expansion. He asked what the cost benefit study done regarding the expansion of the length of the runway to 5,000 feet shows. He also asked what the ramifications of doing all of the elements except the runway extension would be and if the runway extension was being lobbied for by constituencies or someone else. King responded that the Airport Commission did not lobby for the extension. He also read about lobbying relative to other City officials and from what he knows, this information is false. People have not actively lobbied for the airport expansion. Rief explained that a cost analysis was done but she does not know the numbers off the top of her head. She also stated that one of the major benefits of the runway extension is that flights leaving Flying Cloud will no longer have to stop at MSP to take on more fuel and pick up additional passengers. The extension will save on additional trips to MSP which impacts delay times at MSP. Rief suggested that Lamola look at the final EIS on their website which has a section on cost benefits. Lamola said the expansion is incremental improvements and questioned why they need these improvements and what the incremental return is for that versus the cost. King answered that MAC is appointed by the Governor and they decide whether or not they will approve or not approve the expansion. Lamola said that at this point he is not convinced that the expansion is necessary. Bob Laurent, a resident on Carlson Drive, said it has been stated that 450 letters have been sent out for people not abiding by the voluntary restriction and yet nothing has happened and planes are still flying at night. He asked why they don't tell the residents who these violators are. Citizens have a right to this information. Laurent said they are hiding behind FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 10 the State privacy law. He asked when they are going to give them the names of those companies so they know who those bad citizens are. Leqve stated that as a result of sending out those 450 letters good things have happened. They have had dialogue with the violators and the operators have changed their routes when taking off. To say that this is completely ineffective is not fair because there has been some benefit. Also, Leqve said they have been advised by their legal department that this information is not public information. King said that the point is well raised and this is something the Airport Advisory Commission will discuss at their July meeting. An unidentified member of the audience asked if the flight plans are public information. McVey said they are but you don't get them just by asking. There is a procedure that has to be followed and not every plane that flies is on a flight plan. Shelly, an Eden Prairie resident who lives on Cold Stream, said she has lived in the City for only a year and is surprised by the noise coming from Flying Cloud Airport. She asked if the City could amend the agreement between them and MAC. The FAA should know that there are low flying helicopters landing and taking off on a daily basis. Shelly encouraged anyone to sit in their car and observe the take off and landings during the day and listen to the horrible noise all day long. She asked if MAC does anything about the noise complaints they receive that are not early or late and if available, what percentage of the aircraft are following flight path rules on a given day. King explained that there were many people in this room that were involved in the agreement between the City and MAC and there were many gives and takes. The two parties can always sit down if they want to do something different and it is always possible. Nothing is forever. However, one thing that would not be included in the agreement is mandatory restriction because of the FAA. One recourse would be to get Federal law changed In response to the question regarding the handling of calls received during the day, Leqve explained that they have an individual on staff who dedicates his time to complaints and to calling those people who request call backs. If they receive a call during the day they will look into it. They do not send letters to day time violators. Leqve also explained that approximately 50 percent of the departures are in compliance with the day time flight path. Stacy Desai said she would like to ask MAC to invite more senior MAC people to these meetings including the Chairman of MAC and the Executive Director of MAC. King pointed out that the Region's MAC Commissioner would be at the Airport Advisory Commission's September meeting. Desai said there are a lot of emotions going on here at this meeting and they need to figure out a different forum so that they all start on common ground. They are all interested in the future of this community and in safety. Desai said she would be happy to help design a form and to come up with some incentive systems for the operators so that they are good neighbors. She also expressed her appreciation to the group for having this meeting because this is something they don't have to do. Desai said they FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 11 need to build a relationship. This is a complex problem and she does not feel there are any risk takers in the mix. There are people that would like to work with MAC and there may even be people in the audience willing to work with them. She also indicated that they have not received answers to their questions but have received facts. King said he personally would be happy to meet with Desai to discuss her suggestions. He also mentioned that there are Airport Advisory Commission members' terms expiring next year and he would encourage residents to sign up and volunteer their time. Carol Hanson, a resident on Hilltop Road, said they know that there are regulations on take offs but at 5:07 a.m. and 5:35 a.m. there were two airplanes not following the rules and there are other airplanes taking off during early morning hours for business purposes. She asked if they are residents of Eden Prairie. MAC does have a good website but everything seems to be endorsed for the operators and the residents receive no consideration. She asked that they address the issue of lower tax rates for people who live near the airport. An unidentified member of the audience said his concern is for safety. He asked if every single plane that comes through Flying Cloud Airport is identified. He said he thinks it is inexcusable that they can't have a transparent system so that they know what airplane is using the airport. He said they need to have an adequate tracking system and that information should be provided to the residents. King said this is also something the Airport Advisory Commission is concerned about. MAC will be implementing a software package that will allow the residents to query much more effectively what is going on. They will not see the aircraft registration and that is what they will have to figure out as to what information they can release. The Commission will work with MAC to determine what information can be posted. Jeff Peterson, 10083 Gristmill Ridge, said he feels that MAC doesn't care about the residents of Eden Prairie. The residents want to work with MAC but MAC doesn't want to work with them. This is a dysfunctional relationship and the City sold the residents out. It appears that MAC can't control what goes on at the airport. He asked if they are going to do anything about decreasing the noise at the airport or the altitude of the planes. He also asked if there is an alternative proposal that can be instituted without losing funding. Peterson asked if MAC has looked at other options to self fund their operations within the airport itself. Gary Demee, 9425 Shetland Road, said in discussing the automated approach system, will moving the runway 25 percent closer to the homes result in planes landing on that system being 25 percent lower. Rief explained that this is used as a locating point approach to the airport and would remain attached to the threshold to the approach instrument system and will not dictate the approach. Demee said if they are moving the runway 25 percent closer to the houses it would make sense that the approach to the houses would be 25 percent closer than now. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 12 McVey said he did not come prepared to answer questions this evening but does understand what Demee is saying. He said Demee's question should be addressed by the person who does the procedures. The airplanes are bound to be closer to the houses than what they currently are but he cannot say they will be 20 percent closer. Demee asked if there is a safety margin for a 500 foot threshold. McVey explained that the FAA safety restrictions will apply to the approach and safety regulations above obstacles are governed by the FAA. Demee asked if they have a new radio system and computerized system to track some of this can't they take some accountability to track the altitude of planes coming in and address the issues of safety. Leqve explained that flight operations are under the FAA's jurisdiction. Demee also asked what businesses have volunteered to pay towards the airport expansion. Rief said she is not aware of anyone who has specifically signed up to pay a fee to get into the airport. Federal funding goes directly to the projects and not to the building area themselves. They are working a new MAC policy where incoming airport tenants would have to help pay for hangar improvements. Demee said it is obvious that someone is pushing for these airport improvements. Rief explained that they have not asked any private companies to fund this program and that MAC and the FAA are providing the funding for these projects. Floyd Hagen, 15721 Cedar Ridge Road, stated that the airport has been a thorn in his side for 35 years and there is a lot of resentment from the people around the airport for the expansion and especially for the runway extension. He also stated that two issues recently surfaced and one is the financing of these projects. They talk about grants and the responsibility of the FAA and MAC. The citizens are paying taxes so this becomes their responsibility. The second issue is noise. Hagen asked when the latest EIS was written. Rief responded that the final EIS was done in May or June of 2004. Hagen stated that a lot has happened since then and the EIS is fogged. He suggested that someone look at that document and indicated that the agreement with the City is probably on thin water too. Also, they don't have a good handle on what the noise issues will be in the future. Hagen recommended that the Airport Advisory Commission look at the EIS to see if it is still pertinent and to go to the FAA for a ruling on something that is not accurate or up to date. King explained that they have been told that the FAA's decision is complete. Hagen said that if the decision is complete it was based on false data. He also stated that he believes it is wise for the Commission to look at this closely to negate the agreement between the City and MAC. King responded that there is no recourse on the EIS and believes that has to be dealt with through Congress. Hagen reported that at a recent meeting, MAC talked about noise and he recommended at that time that they put noise meters around the airport. These monitors would give them the DB level and everything. Leqve explained that there is no money to do that at this time and he does not see this happening in the near future. However, they do plan to enhance flight tracking at the airport. King said the Airport Advisory Commission will place this item on their agenda for further discussion. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 13 Serguei Usmanova, 17124 Acorn Road, said he believes the agreement between MAC and the City is not chiseled in stone and is not forever. If they disagree with it they should be able to say that and have it changed. King explained that City officials would definitely say that the agreement wasn't signed by accident and that it was a hard negotiation. The agreement was the best they could do and they didn't give up. There was a third party audit of this agreement and they found that both groups complied with the agreement. If one of the groups is not happy with the agreement that is a different issue. An unidentified member of the audience said he is concerned about the altitude of the low flying planes over his home. There is no mechanism to look out for safety with low flying planes. He asked how many of the letters sent out were about low flying planes and how many people have they returned calls to regarding those planes. He also asked if employees of the airport have a number to call if they have concerns. Leqve provided the audience with the number to call to report low flying aircraft and any other issues and concerns related to the community. Letters have been sent relative to Stage 2 operations and other night time operations. Calls are returned to homeowners who request a return call. He stated that the expansion is adding additional utilities to the airport for people who are already there. The runway extension means airplanes can leave with a full load of fuel. The expansion will better serve the customers they have. The unidentified gentleman asked if they can use landing fees for better monitoring since he feels this is an important safety issue. He recommended a landing fee and a take-off fee for those planes using the airport after 10 p.m. He also said it would have been nice to have had an FAA representative on the panel this evening. King said that was a good suggestion and he appreciates McVey coming forward to try to answer some of the questions,however, they did not anticipate that there would have been questions for the FAA. Leqve explained that an evening landing fee would present the issue of arbitrary uses to the airport. Kris from the audience asked how much traffic would increase as a result of this expansion. She said they counted five planes in half an hour at 6 a.m. that left the airport. She also indicated that five years ago the airport was to expand and it was rejected. She asked what the difference is now since they are hearing about it after it has been approved. Kris said there has also been talk about homes depreciating in value because of the airport and she wanted to know who she could call to discuss this. She also asked what the voluntary compliance rate is. Kipp said he was not aware of anything with regard to decreasing values. Harris reported that they have sent out 450 letters for voluntary compliance issues. Many of those operators have altered their flight patterns because they know how important it is to be good neighbors. Some of the letters are also sent to transient and out- of-state operators and they are now aware of the noise issues and have altered their behavior. Harris said it is difficult to predict how many additional flights would result from this expansion. An unidentified male from the audience said MAC is spending $11 million on this project and questioned why they are doing this when changes at MSP will result in additional space there. King explained that there are other people in line to use MSP. They want to FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 12, 2008 Page 14 push the smaller airplanes to the reliever airports and that is why they believe they will fill up the space despite what is going on in the industry. Kris said it appears they are expanding the airport but did no studies on how much additional traffic will be generated. Also, it appears that they do no follow-up with people who do not comply with the voluntary restriction. Harris stated that the voluntary compliance program has resulted in changes in behavior and procedures. Sending letters does initiate an olive branch to begin discussions. With regard to the number of increased flights, Harris explained that the forecasted numbers are in the EIS and he personally does not have the specific numbers. Kris asked if they think the number of flights will double in the year 2009. Harris said no,he did not think they would double. Rita Usmanova said that having an airport in the middle of a city is very uncommon in Europe. She asked why MAC feels they have the right to fly any time or at any altitude. Why are they more important than the residents. Also, she asked if an airplane does come down, do the pilots carry enough insurance to pay for a person's life or home. King responded that all agencies and all people have limitations on what they can do. They have been able to make progress with MAC and there have been benefits to the City. Demee said he made a recommendation in 2000 regarding the monitoring of flights and yet they still don't have an accurate record of who the offenders are. Any time a project is built in the City they have to receive City approval. He asked why they can't request or require MAC to take the low cost approach to monitoring airplanes at the end of each runway. Demee recommended that they place cameras at those locations to take pictures of each tailfin that goes by. King said they have done some work with MAC on that suggestion and they have been testing that. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Motion was made by Michelson, seconded by Schendel, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried, 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.