Loading...
09/19/1985 - Airport Relations Commission CITY OF EAGAN AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 4:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL II. N.O.I.S.E. CONVENTION REPORT - Mayor Bea Blomquist - Councilmember Tom Egan III. COMMITTEE UPDATE - MAC Part 150 Study - Airport Traffic Issues - Metropolitan Tax for Stage III Incentives - North Eagan Subdivisions -180 Degree Heading Status - Run -Up Suppressor IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: CHAIRMAN BAKER & ALL MEMBERS OF THE AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT HOHENSTEIN DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 SUBJECT: AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 A meeting of the Airport Noise Committee is scheduled for Thursday, September 19, 1985, at 4:30 p.m. The meeting will be held in Conference Rooms A and B of the Municipal Center Building. The following discussion is intended to provide background on those items to be reviewed at the meeting on Thursday. MINUTES As a quorum was not present for the June 27, 1985, meeting, no official action was taken and no minutes were kept. For this reason, minutes of the Airport Noise Committee Meeting for April 18, 1985, were not adopted. These minutes are enclosed for your review. These minutes, subject to any change, require adoption by the committee. N.O.I.S.E. CONVENTION REPORT Mayor Bea Blomquist and Councilmember Tom Egan attended the convention of the National Organization to Insure a Sound - controlled Environment (N.O.I.S.E.) on July 25 through the 27th in Sparks, Nevada. These two officials will be on hand to discuss their experience with the committee and to explain how concepts described at the convention may be applied to the airport noise situation in Eagan. Mayor Blomquist and Councilmember Egan will be able to address issues concerning both aircraft equipment and sound abatement procedures. COMMITTEE UPDATE Metropolitan Airports Committee Part 150 Study At the August 27, 1985, MASAC meeting, Howard - Needles, the commission's noise consultant, introduced the Part 150 land use compatibility study. The completion of this study will allow the airports commission to designate specific needs as a basis for federal assistance in dealing with noise abatement activities. To help the consultant to better apply the study to the conditions surrounding airports, MASAC requested that surrounding communities provide input to them before the September 24, 1985, meeting. The first area in which MASAC would like community involvement is in the definition of Environmental Capacity. As you know, this concept is being considered by various public officials as a means of limiting sound impacts on residential neighborhoods. Simply put, the concept of environmental capacity is intended to AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 17,1985 establish a level of sound over a duration of time above which aircraft would be in violation of the environmental capacity standard. Officials hope that aircraft could be prevented from surpassing this standard through some control mechanism. However, the standard itself is difficult to define. Therefore, MASAC requests that individuals and communities forward to them any definition of environmental capacity which they feel best encompasses the concept. The second area in which MASAC requests input is that of abatement procedures. MASAC would like individuals and communities to suggest any possible air traffic procedures or departure and arrival procedures which would have the effect of abating aircraft - generated noise. This would include such items as the review of departure paths over the Minnesota River valley to avoid residential areas, but they may be as simple as closer attention to field rules and approved departure corridors to minimize adverse affects due to poor management of current procedures. MASAC is willing to forward any suggestion to Howard - Needles at this time. Therefore, the City is afforded an opportunity to make various suggestions at one time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To prepare and adopt a definition of environmental capacity and /or to prepare and adopt a list of sound abatement procedures to be forwarded to MASAC as part of the Part 150 land use compatability study. Airport Traffic Issues Metropolitan Tax for Stage 3 Incentives At the August 27, 1985, MASAC meeting, Jan DelCalzo discussed her proposal for a metropolitan tax to provide air carriers with incentives to purchase stage 3 aircraft. Her premises for putting forward this suggestion were that the resources be generated where the greatest benefit would occur and that the solution be at the source of the problem, namely noisy stage 2 aircraft. She pointed out that the third of a mill additional tax would amount to $5 per year on a $80,000 home. There was substantial opposition from the audience to this proposal and Commissioner DelCalzo admitted that she did not expect the proposal to be implemented, but appreciated the debate it generated for the fact that alternatives to her proposal had been suggested. She also argued that source alternatives are the best near term solution to sound problems because both the construction of a new airport and the private acquisition of stage 3 aircraft will occur over a 15 -year time period. While no action is necessary on this particular item, the Committee may wish to discuss the concepts which it raises. AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 North Eagan Subdivisions At the June 27, 1985, Airport Noise Committee meeting, the concept of providing targeted relief to the residential subdivisions of northern Eagan was proposed. In particular, the McKee Addition is a traditional recipient of a substantial amount of the airport noise. It has received an even greater volume of air traffic noise during the recent summer months due to the increased volume of airport traffic. An additional burden to this area lies in the fact that it is not spared significant noise impacts, even when the departure corridor is well observed. Therefore, a local resident has proposed that alternatives be investigated which would encourage the conversion of certain traditional residential properties to their industrial designation as is indicated on the City's comprehensive land use guide plan. One of the alternatives in this area is to provide tax increment financing to purchase affected homes or to encourage a private developer to purchase, raze, and redevelop such an area. Because of the sensitive nature of proposing public financing to relieve specific residential neighborhoods, it is important that the committee seriously consider and investigate such a suggestion before recommending its implementation. The committee should be aware that the City Council agreed to tax increment financing at the time of the race track competition. The Council has indicated that that may have been a one -time decision. It may not be approved in the future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny a recommendation to pursue an investigation of the City financing alternatives for northern Eagan subdivisions affected by airport noise. 180 Degree Heading Status The Metropolitan Airports Commission recommendation that the 180 degree heading procedure be implemented has not yet been forwarded to Mr. Les Case of the Federal Aviation Administration. As you will recall, the recommendation approved by the Airports Commission included the elimination of the 200 degree heading and its replacement with the 180 degree heading. It further included recommendation that a full environmental impact statement be completed before the procedure would be adopted. These two conditions have caused Mr. Case to be less enthusiastic about the implementation of the procedure. Staff concludes that Mr. Case is reluctant to accept the recommendation because it gives his controllers no more departure corridors than they currently have and it requires the time and expense of the environmental impact study. He is free to implement the procedure without reference to either condition, but this is likely to be an area in which we could exert influence through our representative, Mr. Frenzel. AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 17,1985 The 180 degree heading controversy has softened significantly since the increase in air traffic volume has resulted in the almost exclusive use of the parallel runways. The preferential runway system which includes the runway 22 departures is used less than a few hours per day, according to Mr. Case. Staff will continue to monitor the status of the procedure recommendations. No action on this item is necessary on the part of the committee at this time. Run -up Suppressor At the July 23, 1985, meeting of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, a proposal to prepare a response to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency concerning the run -up noise suppressor was discussed. The feeling of the commission seemed to be that the cost of the suppressor was not justified by the number of complaints received on run -ups. MAC staff was therefore directed to develop a response which would address the costs and benefits of the suppressor and the alternatives to its construction. Staff is unaware of any further action on this particular item. It should be noted, however, that the presence of this issue on the MAC agenda was brought about by the actions of this committee to bring the state attorney general and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to bear on the airports commission. Staff will continue to monitor developments in this area. While no action is necessary on this item, the committee may wish to discuss a potential response to the airport commission's position on this matter. Aynis rative Assistan JH /jj cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Dale Runkle, City Planner Paul Hauge, City Attorney 4 MINUTES OF THE EAGAN AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE EAGAN, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 1985 The Eagan Airport Noise Committee met at the City Hall on April 18, 1985 at 4:30 p.m. Those present were Chairman Tom Baker, Members Carol DeZois, Joe Harrison and John Gustin. Also present were City Councilmember Tom Egan, and Guest Carolyn Braun; also Dr. David Braslau, Dave Kelso of the MPCA, City Administrator Hedges, Administrative Intern John Hohenstein, City Planner Dale Runkle, and City Attorney Paul Hauge. Chairman Tom Baker chaired the meeting. MINUTES John Gustin moved, Joe Harrison seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. All voted yes. DAVID BRASLAU - PRESENTATION Tom Hedges introduced Dr. David Braslau of David Braslau Associates, Inc., who was formerly a professor at the University of Minnesota in geophysics and has acted as an expert dealing with noise issues throughout the area, • including the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Dr. Braslau reviewed several reports, including one that he was commissioned by the MAC to present in 1977. He showed some transparencies with aircraft noise impact facing specific directions relating to run -ups on the Wold Chamberlain site. Run -ups technically are permitted only at heading 290 ° , according to regulation. He stated that the reason for the location selected for run -ups was because it was the only place where there was runway clearance and there is clearly a need for sufficient clearance. He reviewed several types of suppressers used at different airport locations around the world and noted that a suppresser is a muffler at the rear portion of an aircraft. He mentioned that it was hard to determine which methods worked, including the suppressers and mufflers because the users usually said no and the airport operators were favorable. He stated that berming would be required to be 30 to 40 feet high and the plane would have to be very close to the berm to be effective. He also thought that airlines are generally using the suppressers with mufflers and also there is a need to shield intake noise to be effective. More up -to -date aircraft have smaller noise impact areas and it was his opinion that mufflers or hush - houses are the most effective suppressants. Mufflers cost about $250,000.00 in 1977. JT -8 and JT -9 type engines, including the 729, require the most run -ups. New engines have built -in monitors. Wind direction including volicity, is important and these factors differ from one location to another, and change regularly. 1 Noise Committee Minutes April 18, 1985 The MAC has positioned microphones around the run -up pads at certain threshholds and noise triggers the microphones to computers, but he noted that other noises also trigger the microphones and felt that cameras are important to monitor the run -up noise. Dave Kelso who was also present, stated that it is possible to monitor run -ups that are recorded. In 1976 the Air Development Act required noise suppresser equipment. Mr. Kelso stated that there is noise suppression money available but local FAA and airport officials do not work together to acquire the funds. The MAC view is that the suppressers may not do much to reduce noise, but field rules or procedural methods have been adopted to reduce noise. Cost and the complications, however, deter purchase of necessary equipment. Also, different sized airplanes require different types of suppresser equipment. A Noise Suppresser Equipment Plan has not been submitted to the PCA by MAC, it was noted. The PCA has been asked to sue MAC many times and the PCA has turned the issue over to the office of the attorney general. The PCA has outlined the history of the suppresser legislation and has started informal enforcement, requesting what MAC's intentions are. If there is no action, it will be brought to the PCA Board and then on to the OAG office. Field rules require the airlines to report each run -up but there is some uncertainty as to compliance. The real issue is which agency has jurisdiction. The PCA now feels it may have to go to Court in order to force the run -up regulations according to Mr. Kelso. Dr. Braslau stated that if the field rules are developed and enforced properly, they could be effective. He mentioned that it may now cost $50,000,000.00 to build an adequate suppresser capable of servicing all aircraft. The PCA would like to jointly stipulate to enforcement of the field rules and then provide for enforcement through the OAG. Dave Kelso stated that the history of the suppreser legislation started in 1976 and the deadline for submitting the plans has been moved up by the Legislature several times. Representative Wes Skoglund did not accept MAC's reason for extension of time and Mr. Skoglund wasn't willing to compromise to extend the deadline date past March 1, 1985. He has indicated that possibly the only way to effectively do it is to get the area residents' support and become more aggressive. The PCA will conduct public hearings as a result of a Petition from the south Minneapolis residents regarding noise guidelines. Dr. Braslau also felt that the MAC can do much to collect information but is not doing an adequate job at the present time. MASAC MEETINGS It was noted the MASAC Operations Committee has acted in favor of the 180 degree turn and that MASAC will act at its regular meeting on April 23, 1985 on the Operation Committee's recommendation. There was also discussion as to whether the 180 degree turn would require an EIS and Mr. Kelso stated that because the FAA has jurisdiction over aircraft after leaving the ground, only the Federal EIS would come into play. The FAA, however, does not want liability regarding this type of issue and FAA has stated that it will not require an EIS on the 180 degree turn. 2 Noise Committee Minutes April 18, 1985 STATUS OF ANNUAL NOISE ABATEMENT PLAN The PCA has reacted to MAC's report but there has been no reply from MAC, and Mr. Kelso stated there has been no substantive change by MAC regarding the plan. AIRPORT FREQUENCIES The following frequencies are available for specific purposes: 126.7- - Control Tower; 121.9 -- Ground Control; 135.35 -- General Information. NOVEMBER 20, 1984 & MARCH 19, 1985 RESOLUTIONS John Hohenstein reported for Tom Hedges that Daryl Westlander had called in response to Tom Hedges' last letter of March 19, and indicated that MAC will submit an answer. NOISE COMMITTEE MEMBERS There was discussion concerning status of members of the Noise Committee and Mr. Harrison suggested that the City Council eliminate non - active members • and elect new members that are willing to be active on the Committee. It was further suggested that the non - active members be dropped from the Committee if they are not interested and able to be present at the meetings. Harrison moved, Gustin seconded the motion to recommend Carolyn Braun be appointed by the Council as a member of the Noise Committee. All members voted yes. NEXT MEETING No specific date was set for the next meeting and the staff will contact the Noise Committee members regarding the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the motion was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. All voted in favor. PHH 3