Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFlying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission - 08/02/2000 OFFICIAL NOTES FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION WEDNESDAY,AUGUST 2, 2000 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER PRAIRIE ROOM A & B 8080 MITCHELL ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE COMMISSION MEMBERS: Jeff Bauer, Tom Heffelfinger, Jeff Larsen, Laura Neuman, Gary Schmidt, Joe Smith, John Smith STAFF: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner RECORDING SECRETARY: Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL Jeff Bauer, Tom Heffelfinger, Gary Schmidt and John Smith were absent. As there was not a quorum, Chair Joe Smith said the Commission could not have a formal meeting or take any actions. However, there could be discussion of the topics on the agenda. Representing the Metropolitan Airports Commission were Chad Levque, Chad Versteeg, Joe Harris and Mitch Kilian. Visitors were Loren and Norma Wuttke, 16860 Flying Cloud Drive. II. APPROVAL OF MAY 3, 2000 MINUTES Laura Neuman noted that page 6, paragraph 2, of the May 3 minutes did not mention the concern that was expressed about the safety issue, in addition to the noise issue, which the Commission had with regard to the construction of Grace Church. There was a discussion regarding the large number of people attending the church, the structure height, and compatibility of that kind of structure being built so close to the airport. Scott Kipp reported that the City Council approved the Grace Church project at its meeting on August 1. He said he forwarded a memo to the Council regarding the safety issue. Tim Anderson of MAC spoke to the Council about the noise issue. He wanted the church to indicate they would not object to the aircraft noise. The property is guided for church use and has met all the requirements from the Met Council. III. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Status of Part 161 Study (Sent to Advisory Commission by MAC) and Status of Draft Environmental Impact Statement Chad Levque introduced Chad Versteeg, a summer intern doing noise monitoring out of the airport. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 2 Levque said he would cover the EIS as well as the Part 161 Study. Revisions are currently being incorporated into the EIS, obtained from the 161 Study, regarding fleet information and runway use, noise analysis, air quality and bird strikes. Currently there are no Stage 2 jets operating at Flying Cloud Airport. The possibility of numbers increasing is very minimal. Other airports have no concern because they don't expect to increase use of Stage 2 operations. New information will probably not change for the Part 161 Study, so MAC will try to utilize this information to enhance the EIS. Neuman asked if airport noise is being monitored daily. Levque said the summer study would cover 300 hours at a minimum. There is a dual purpose in this effort. It includes assessing noise generated by aircraft. In addition, individual noise monitors assess runway use at the airport. This information is being logged, so they have a good basis for figuring out how the airport is used. Initially they assumed they would meet 100 percent compliance with voluntary noise abatement. Information obtained from other Midwest airports that have a similar situation has indicated that 50 percent compliance is more realistic. The result of incorporating reduced Stage 2 operations into the model is that contours would probably be smaller on noise exposure maps being drawn up. MAC has received 150 letters on the Draft EIS. They are in the process of preparing responses to all the comments. Copies of residents' letters will be incorporated in the Draft EIS document. The Department of Fish and Wildlife has concerns about bird activity south of the airport. MAC is hoping to have the document ready for distribution in December, after which they would be receiving any comments from the public. Neuman asked what MAC's position would be if the Department of Fish and Wildlife strongly recommends not flying south of the airport. Levque replied the FAA is looking at the environmental process relative to the operations of aircraft. The safety issue was brought up with regard to bird strikes. From the viewpoint of the EIS, that is being evaluated now. There have been six bird strikes over a ten-year period. Levque thought they probably occur closer to the approach end of the runways, and are not as likely to occur in the over-flight area at 1000 feet AGL. Levque said the public hearing on proposed nighttime restrictions will be held on Tuesday, August 15, at 7 p.m. at Hennepin Technical College. MAC officials will be there from 5-7 p.m. to answer questions. Copies of the document have been mailed to the public libraries and city halls in surrounding communities. Comments are due by August 30. Kipp questioned a number of items in the Part 161 Study, which appeared to be errors. Levque responded to those. Neuman asked if MAC plans to put the hard data Chad Versteeg is collecting into the Part 161 Study and the EIS. Levque said yes, they are incorporating that in the EIS now. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 3 Neuman asked for proof of where the information came from on 50 percent voluntary compliance by operators, and if any of the other information Versteeg is getting verified that number. Levque said they could get more information as part of the analysis. When runway use information is reviewed, it shows there is high use south of the airport. The analysis they do every year shows that there is good compliance with the noise abatement plan when planes are using the south runway. Levque said he talked to all operators at Flying Cloud about the noise abatement plan and put together a fact sheet on the plan, which was handed out at the last meeting of the operators. He also talked to the instructors, and any pilots who were at the airport, and mailed copies to all reliever airports. He discussed the noise abatement plan and the need to comply with it, and the importance of cultivating good relationships between the airport and the community that resides around the airport. There has been an effort to heighten the awareness of all the operators that this noise abatement plan is in place. He said he believes 50 percent compliance is a fair number. Neuman said MAC could get that across even more. She didn't see anything about the noise abatement plan in the information provided to reliever airports and lease agreements with operators. She thought it should be stated in those documents, even though it is voluntary. Also, she checked the Internet, under Flying Cloud Airport, and found there is nothing about these voluntary restrictions or curfew hours. The noise abatement plan is on the Web,but it is not connected with Flying Cloud Airport. Larsen suggested including the abatement policy at the bottom of the leasing document. Levque said they use FAA leasing documents and the federal authority preempts the local authority. These are public airports and that is why MAC uses FAA documents. Neuman said the way the EIS is written, it appears MAC's conclusion is that there's no Stage 2 aircraft in the Upper Midwest; therefore MAC doesn't need mandatory restrictions. Neuman said she didn't know if that is the intent. Levque said no, it isn't. The intent is to go with Stage 2 restrictions from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. That is in the document under"Proposed Restrictions." Kipp said he came to the same conclusion. The FAA could say we don't need mandatory restrictions. Kilian said that is what MAC had to put in the document. Neuman said the fact there are no Stage 2 aircraft doesn't mean MAC can't have mandatory restrictions. Levque said the framework is such that it reads this way. The question it asks is, can we reach the desired outcome via voluntary means? FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 4 Neuman said she didn't think it seemed that forceful. For example, the information on cost/benefit numbers that states property values are not affected by proximity to an airport. The only support for that in the Part 161 Study is a telephone conversation with one land developer. She recommended having a study done by people who do studies for a living. As a lay person, she would like to see more data. Levque responded it is hard to find significant diminution of property values due to airport noise. Loren Wettke, 16860 Flying Cloud Drive , said he has had 44 years of experience dealing with real estate values. The airport and its noise do have a detrimental effect on real estate values. Of course, over a long period of time that property will rise in value because of inflation, so it will be worth more than it was years ago. However, in East Richfield it is easy to tell the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport has had a detrimental effect. A developer, who had been interested in developing Wettke's property, found out the airport is planning to expand and was no longer interested. Levque told Neuman to use the comment period to send in her comments to MAC. Neuman said she would do that,but also wanted Levque to make a note of them. (1) Where did the 50 percent voluntary compliance figure come from? MAC is going to have to get hard data from the airport to back that up. (2) Specific cost/benefit numbers and where they come from. Neuman said it seemed to her that information about the proposed expansion has not been publicized very much in newspapers, etc. When she moved to Eden Prairie, the realtors didn't tell her about it. The airport has been around a long time and she thought it was land-locked and couldn't expand. Smith said people shouldn't expect the airport to stay as it is forever. The noise impact on the community hasn't stopped development around the airport. Kilian said throughout the 1990s the proposed expansion went through the public process and through Metro Council to get the plans approved. They held public hearings for about five years, and went through the Metropolitan Council and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. Kilian said there are state guidelines they have to follow, and MAC followed them. Kipp said when the long-term plan for expansion first came out, the City sent notices to all Eden Prairie homes. The Eden Prairie News has covered the process in detail. Regarding the 161 Study, Neuman asked for an explanation of the Stage 2 prohibition at Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport. Kipp said, under the proposed ordinance, it mentions that Part 121 cargo is not permitted. Does that mean Part 91 cargo operation would be permitted? FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 5 Smith said he would need to research that. The idea is to keep Flying Cloud Airport from being a hub for FedEx and UPS operations. A charter operator could have 15 planes in its fleet. They may have dual functions. Levque said this fell under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act passed in 1990 for planes operating in excess of 75,000 pound, which does not apply to Stage 2. Also, the international civil aeronautics agency organized a plan to have Stage 4 aircraft as the standard by 2001. Regarding Stage 3 aircraft, they probably weigh over 75,000 pounds. Stage 3 aircraft are just being acquired. B. Reliever Lease Policies, Rules and Regulations Kilian said the reliever leasing policies have new language that will be incorporated into their leases. MAC has adopted a full sewer and water policy. Smith said this is for tenants, not for operators. Kilian stated the public hearing on the new language is scheduled for Wednesday, August 9. This will affect tenants' leases by tightening them up. IV. NOISE ABATEMENET/AIRCRAFT INCIDENTS A. Noise Complaints for May and June 2000 The map showing noise complaints for Flying Cloud Airport, covering April through June, was distributed. There were a total of seven complaints registered. Levque said MAC is working on storage of a data base so people can be more specific when they call in. Loren Wuttke said there is an assumption that there's one aircraft that has a loud morning flight. Smith asked if the airport manager has talked to that pilot. Kilian said yes, he has talked to Executive Aviation and they will try to move the plane to St. Paul Airport. He told Executive Aviation the Flying Cloud Airport Commission is very concerned about it and asked him, at least in good wind conditions, to go over a different area and not over the same area. Wuttke showed a map of flight patterns and said it shows the majority of departures are right over his property. He would like to see something done about departures. He said, when taking off from an airport, pilots should go straight for a distance and then, when they get more altitude, turn south. There are eagles near where he lives, and he is afraid one of them will get hit by a plane. There is a lot of bird activity in that area. When his oak tree was almost hit by a plane, he called the airport control tower right away and was told the pilot had such a load of baggage, along with fuel,he hardly made it above the tree line. Norma Wuttke asked if the noise complaint map is produced every three months. Their calls are not listed on the map. She and her husband have been very consistent about calling the two numbers they were given. They have called for over two years but have never had a call back. They have called the control tower when planes flew very low. They were told never to call again because they FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 6 would be charged with harassment. She thought the control tower could have informed the pilots. Loren Wuttke said when they called the hot line they have always gotten the recording. No one has ever responded to their calls. He hasn't stopped calling the control tower. He asked MAC not to allow so many planes to fly over their property. Neuman said the reason she began noticing the time they flew over is because there is a curfew between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Smith told her there is a voluntary curfew for no maintenance run-ups but no curfew for prop-driven planes departing during those times. Kilian added that the voluntary curfew only applies to Stage 2 jet planes. If it were a Stage 3 jet, it would not be in violation of the curfew. There are FAA restrictions on over-flying residential property. But for take-offs and landings, planes have to fly quite low. There are no flight height restrictions. That is why MAC has safety zones. Smith said operators are trying to foster voluntary compliance. That is why education on the voluntary process is so important. Levque said that at the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport(MSP) in March 1993, about 52 percent of the complaints were about daytime noise. MAC has a noise- monitoring system at MSP. The complaints went down to 17 percent and continued to decrease every year until there were none by 2000. That is why he is meeting with operators at Flying Cloud Airport to encourage them to comply with voluntary agreements. A voluntary program should not be dismissed as unworkable, because MAC has seen it works at MSP. They will continue to foster that understanding. Neuman inquired if MAC can reduce the noise level from aircraft flying in and out of Flying Cloud. Kilian responded Flying Cloud doesn't have scheduled operations, so it is hard to determine. Kipp said he believed the voluntary agreement was for all aircraft, not just for jet planes, in the EIS noise mitigation plans, which came out of the noise mitigation committee. He said MAC needs to work with operators to comply with this time curfew. B. June 8, 2000 Aircraft Accident Update Kipp said he didn't have specific details about why it happened. The plane took off to the south on runway 18. The plan tried to return to the airport but lost altitude and did an"S" turn, ending up in the marsh area. Kilian said the National Transportation Safety Board hasn't filed a final report. There was a certified flight instructor on board with the student. They tried to come back to the field; and in doing so they lost control. Both survived the crash, but the flight instructor was badly injured. Eden Prairie police and fire department did a good job with a quick response. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT COMMISSION OFFICIAL NOTES August 2, 2000 Page 7 C. Early Morning Departures Complaint Update Neuman distributed copies of a letter she wrote to Gary Schmidt at MAC, listing her formal complaints about early morning flights over her house from Flying Cloud Airport, and asking that these complaints be included in MAC's formal complaint record for the second quarter. Loren Wuttke said he would like to develop his property into a senior citizen campus. He has talked to the City about this proposal and they believe it is a good idea. Wuttke hoped there is a way to work out problems with MAC. He hasn't talked to anybody at MAC about it, however. MAC representatives present encouraged him to do so. V. OTHER BUSINESS A. Air Expo 2000 Kilian commented on the Air Expo held on July 22 and 23. They didn't receive a lot of noise complaints during that time period. The pilots did a good job of keeping the planes as quiet as possible. Over 10,000 people attended. MAC has a firm policy against acrobatic flying. However, formation flying is allowed. B. Tour of Flying Cloud Airport Neuman said that at the last meeting they had talked about having a tour of the airport. Smith said he could show Commission members around individually if they come to the airport. Kilian said it would be easier to tour no more than two people at the same time because the control tower is a small area. VI. ADJOURNMENT Smith thanked the visitors. He adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting is November 1, 2000. Scott Kipp said to give any future agenda items to him.