Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFlying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission - 07/11/2013 APPROVED MINUTES FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION THURSDAY,JULY 11, 2013 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM 1 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Tschohl, Vice-Chair; Commissioners: Caryl Hansen, Jeff Nawrocki, and Joe Sutila STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Peter Humbert COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: George Esbensen, Fire Chief Lori Creamer, Recording Secretary VISITORS: Jennifer Lewis, MAC Representative I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Vice Chair Tschohl called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Tschohl asked to add "Phase out of Civil Stage 2 aircraft" as item "d" under Discussion Items and move the current item "d" "landscaping issue letter" as item "e" MOTION: Hansen moved, seconded by Sutila, to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried 4-0. III. PUBLIC COMMENT IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. COMMISSION MEETING HELD THURSDAY, MAY 9, 2013 MOTION: Motion was made by Sutila, seconded by Hansen, to approve the May 9, 2013 minutes as presented. The motion carried 4-0. V. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. POSSIBLE FALL TOUR Normally this would have been the meeting when the commission toured Flying Cloud Airport. Tschohl stated the commission would still like to take a tour of Flying Cloud Airport possibly this fall when the student representatives and hopefully chair Larsen would be able to attend. Nawrocki replied he would probably be able to make that work. Commissioners asked when the tour would be— a week day or Saturday possibly. Nawrocki FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2013 Page 2 stated historically the tour has been held on the same day as a regular meeting starting around 3:00 pm and commencing with the regular meeting at 7:00 pm. He will set up something for September 12, 2013, the next regularly scheduled meeting. Some areas of interest at the airport would be the runway construction for the 1836 project, the new Thunderbird site, possibly ASI or Premier. Nawrocki suggested Thunderbird Aviation or Premier Jet would be good places to tour. Meet at Gate A near the tower at 3:00pm B. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WATCH SUMMIT Tschohl shared with the commission information regarding the 3rd Annual International Airport Watch Summit on Friday, July 12 —Sunday, July 14. There will be a variety of speakers from the US and Canada. He stated he would be making a presentation on general aviation and invited the commission to attend. C. NOISE COMPLAINTS/STAGE 2 OPERATIONS REPORT FOR MAY AND JUNE Jennifer Lewis, MAC Representative, presented the noise complaints received by MAC for the months of May and June, 2013. Total complaints for the month of May were 354 compared to 119 for the same time period in 2012, which a very large increase. However, the increase is contributed largely to one household. 19 households complained compared to 25 last year. Nighttime complaints totaled 198 with 15 of those pertaining to helicopter operations. The top 4 complainants contributed 9 1% of complaints; however#81 was responsible for 63% of the complaints. There has been no contact with this household which we talked about at the last meeting. Internally we are going to draft up our own method of communication and will reach out to this complainant in a non intrusive way. It has not been the policy of MAC to seek information regarding complainants, however when people supply their information we will contact then via letter. MAC will invite the complainant to contact them and that's as far as they will take it. Tschohl asked what type of information is given. Lewis replied the required information is address, airport, date, time and nature of the complaint. They have the ability to select their own complaint/comments then MAC tries to interpret the data. The complainant is not required to submit phone number or name. MAC will send a letter to the address that has been submitted. Our goal is twofold; 1) MAC has acknowledged the complaints received 2) the person who owns the household will be aware that someone is submitting complaints from their address. Sutila asked if that complainant was in the area of Pioneer Trail and Marshall Road. Lewis responded it is almost straight out from Runway 28 left departure runway, going right over the top of this household. Esbensen commented it was an area of town homes and upper middle class single family homes. Lewis noted this person began submitting complaints in June of 2012. Esbensen stated to his knowledge no one has talked with or complained to any council members or the city manager about the noise issue. Lewis will report back to the commission in September as to what the response was to the letter they sent. Tschohl asked about the other 3 individuals in the top 4, if MAC has been in contact with them as well. Lewis stated yes all three have been contacted. They have been logging complaints since 2008. Household#30 submitted 32 complaints in May, #226 submitted 39 complaints in May and#128 submitted 27 complaints in May. All the numbers are consistent in June. In FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2013 Page 3 June the top 4 households represented 90% of the complaints and again#81 representing 65% of the total complaints. Of the 460 complaints submitted in June, 298 of them were submitted from household#81. Esbensen asked how the complaints were coming in; via internet or phone, and was it a particular time of day. Esbensen wondered if there was a pattern to the days/time of the week. Lewis stated there didn't seem to be a particular pattern;however she would look into that and report back to the commission. Tschohl asked how many of them were correlated to Flying Cloud complaints. Lewis said the majority of them were, however, she didn't have that data with her. She recalled there was a mixture, but didn't want to venture a guess until further research. Tschohl asked about the run up complaints and portable noise monitoring out at the airport. Are we still monitoring those? Lewis stated MAC is not using portable noise monitoring for the reliever airports. They do have a portable noise monitoring process that is part of the MSP community outreach and utilization of the portable noise monitoring goes through the noise oversight committee for MSP. We do not have a formalized program to monitoring noise at reliever airports. The commission could decide to submit a proposal to the MAC on how to handle the request. It isn't something we do generally for everyone, we would have to develop a process and criteria how we would choose which locations and other requests that may come in. Tschohl asked if#81 continues to send in complaints we as a commission may ask for monitoring for that household. Esbensen stated look how far out from Marshall Road the area is. Lewis stated it seems to be right where the aircraft make the turn. In the month of May there were 19 households that submitted complaints, one household driving the 292 complaints. Lewis agreed to provide a summary report as to how many complaints correlate with Flying Cloud, which ones are not correlated with Flying Cloud and what kinds of aircraft they are as it seems like it is regular activity that generates the complaints. It will be interesting to know if this person responds to our letter when we send it out. Even in our letter we could invite them to come to a commission meeting and see what happens. Tschohl stated the outreach approach is something that has worked for us in the past when we have had these outliers. Lewis stated the commission report for June indicates 460 complaints which is 400% more than what were submitted in 2012. The huge increase is attributed to one household. 40% of the complaints are related to nighttime activity. That number is also greater, almost a 100% increase but fewer households. 14 households in 2013 compared to 16 in 2012. When we look at operators that generated complaints during the nighttime hours, 12 operators were identified in June 2013 compared to 15 in June of 2012 so that's a bit of an improvement. In May we did have 35 operators that generated letters compared to 29 in 2012, which is a bit of an increase in the number of letters in May. When we look at helicopter operations the numbers of operations being correlated to helicopters is greater. We are doing some extra steps to identify helicopter operations at Flying Cloud because we do see there are an increased number of concerns about the helicopter operations. We even had the little red helicopter show up again, but surprisingly no one complained about that. Nawrocki stated that helicopter was associated with the FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2013 Page 4 mosquito control. The numbers of complaints that were generated were actually correlated with unknown aircraft. Most of the helicopter operations come through as unknown in our data. Most are operating VFR which doesn't include any identification as it comes through the flight tracking system. Most helicopters will be unknown. MAC is trying to use other methods to tag them. Tschohl asked will you be looking at things like slower speed, lower altitude, tight maneuvering. Lewis stated they listen to radio transmission, do look at speed and altitude we also ask and get observations from the tower if there is a question. That makes it easy for us. When we are not sure, we don't monkey with it. Lewis reported there have been no Stage 2 operations reported since June, 2012. We have gone 12 months without any Stage 2 operations. Tschohl talked about the phasing out of the civil stage 2 by the end of 2015. In the July 2nd edition of the Federal Register it talks about the final rule the FAA published regarding a map on civil stage 2 aircraft. The FAA reauthorizing bill passed a year and a half ago included the phasing out of civil stage 2 aircraft. Part of that law included instructions to the FAA on how to carry out that band because without change in the regulations it is essentially an unenforceable law. There are 599 stage 2 aircraft left in the United States. Exceptions include experimental certificates to stage 3 regulation engines and air shows. What is the impact in Eden Prairie? There have not been any stage 2 aircraft at Flying Cloud for a year. It will have minimal effect, aside from air shows which those aircraft would be operating under an experimental certificate. The only two states that are outside of the regulation are Alaska and Hawaii. Lewis discussed the effect on the final agreement with the City of Eden Prairie regarding engines with hush kits or re-engineering. The City may want to review the requirements in the final agreement. Basically there will never be a violation of that and I'm thinking that's a good thing. The purpose of the rule was to track operations and if there were over 75 operations in a rolling 12 month period, that would be a violation of the agreement. The MAC would be committed to engage in the part 161 process that would ban those types of aircraft at Flying Cloud. There is not a point to that. Not sure what the City's approach would be—if the agreement would be modified or if that piece of the agreement becomes satisfied. This is something the MAC will still track based on type, we don't gage if the aircraft has had a hush kit or re-engine or any other technical modifications done to it. MAC still assumes they are a stage 2 which a letter is sent. It is up to the operator to respond to the letter stating what type of aircraft it is. Tschohl asked if this is something we want to bring to the City in a memorandum or wait until the MAC comes to the city. Walt until 2016; see what the stage 2 aircraft traffic is. Esbensen stated he didn't see a need to proactively go after the point and spend money on both sides for attorney's fees, etc. He will advise the City Council on the status. The belief is those type of aircraft will be done; owners wouldn't want to spend the money to upgrade the engines, so it becomes a mute point. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2013 Page 5 D. LANDSCAPE ISSUE LETTER MAC recently received a letter from Robert Cody, HOA president of the Hennepin Village Association regarding the dead trees along the south end of the airport. Background: In 2009 the City of Eden Prairie and MAC worked with the Hennepin Village association regarding the dying trees on the burm on the south end of the airfield. In the spring of 2010 20 trees died. Nawrocki stated the trees will be replaced on Monday, July 15. The MAC is still committed to replace the 15 trees and plant an additional 9 trees behind CH Robinson. They are also trying to be sensitive to the residents in the area. Tschohl asked why so many trees had died out there? Nawrocki stated the explanation from the State Arborist is because of the harsh winter many of the trees died off. They will be replaced with a variety of hardy trees. Tschohl asked why was locust trees were planted. Nawrocki didn't know, but stated this time there will be a variety of trees for a balance. Nawrocki talked with Mr. Cody regarding the process for replacing the trees and he was ok with the plan. Cody was going to relay the information to the board. Nawrocki said he has been and would continue to be available to meet with the Hennepin Village Association board to talk about issues as they eb and flow. VI. EDUCATIONAL ITEMS VII. NOISE ABATEMENT/AIRCRAFT INCIDENTS Chief Esbensen reported on June 12, 2013 there was a small jet that went off the runway at Flying Cloud Airport. There were no injuries resulting from the crash. Esbensen stated it wasn't a big deal, the life safety emergency response team responded. Nawrocki stated the response from the Eden Prairie Police and Fire was outstanding. The communication between the control tower and responders worked out well. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. QUARTERLY MEETING Esbebsen asked the commission how they felt about changing the commission meetings from once every other month to quarterly. The reason he was proposing this change is because the commission really hasn't had any burning issues to be resolved. If there is an issue that arises, a special meeting can be called at that time. Tschohl asked how to communicate this to the council since the meeting schedule was approved by them. Esbensen didn't think the council would be opposed to the change; the commission would need to keep them informed of pressing issues. The commission members present were supportive of the idea, as well as the MAC representative. MOTION: Motion was made by Tschohl, seconded by Pratten, to keep the September 12, 2013 airport tour at 3:00 with no meeting following; next meeting October 10, 2013. The FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 11, 2013 Page 6 2014 meeting schedule would be January 9, April 10, July 10 and October 9. The motion carried 4-0. IX. OTHER BUSINESS A. VARIOUS FYI ITEMS 1. Airport Tour— September 12, 2013, 3:00 pm. 2. Next commission meeting October 10, 2013. XII. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Motion was made by Sutila, seconded by Hansen, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.