Loading...
07/24/2018 - Airport Relations CommissionAGENDA EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION WORKSHOP EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER EAGAN ROOM TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018 6:00PM I.ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA II.VISITORS TO BE HEARD III.PREPARATION FOR AUGUST 27 LISTENING SESSION IV.REMOTE MONITORING TOWER LOCATIONS AND COVERAGE V.OTHER BUSINESS VI.ADJOURNMENT 1 Memo To: Airport Relations Commission From: Dianne Miller, Assistant City Administrator Date: July 19, 2018 Subject: July 24, 2018 ARC Meeting The Eagan Airport Relations Commission will meet on Tuesday, July 24 at 6 pm in the Eagan Room (2nd floor of City Hall). To ensure a quorum is present, please contact Executive Assistant Cheryl Stevenson at (651) 675-5005 or cstevenson@cityofeagan.com if you are unable to attend the meeting. I.ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA The agenda, as presented or modified, is in order for adoption by the Commission. II.VISITORS TO BE HEARD The Eagan City Council and its Commissions set aside up to ten minutes at the beginning of public meetings to permit visitors to address items of interest that are not addressed on the regular agenda. Items that will take more than ten minutes or that require specific action can be scheduled for a future meeting agenda. III.PREPARATION FOR AUGUST 27 MAC LISTENING SESSION The Commission requested the opportunity to talk about the upcoming MAC Listening Session being held on Monday, August 27, 6:30-8pm at the Eagan Community Center. Specifically, the Commission is asked to brainstorm topics the MAC and FAA could cover at the meeting, in advance of opening the floor to public comment. Enclosed on pages 4-25 is the presentation used at the 2016 ARC Town Hall Meeting, which includes questions solicited from residents in advance. Assistant City Administrator Miller will be prepared to speak to the various outreach opportunities and channels to get the word out about the August 27 event. 2 IV. REMOTE MONITORING TOWERS LOCATIONS AND COVERAGE On July 10, the Commission discussed the series of eight remote monitoring towers (RMT) that are located in Eagan. A suggestion was made by a citizen in attendance that gaps exist in the coverage of the RMT over Eagan. Enclosed on page 26 is a map showing the RMT coverage area. Dana Nelson, Manager of the MAC Noise and Environment Office, shared that the coverage map shows the cylinders, or buffer areas, around each RMT. If an aircraft flies within an RMT buffer and the flight time matches with a sound event time, then the MACNOMS system will log the event as an aircraft sound event. One will notice the overlap in many areas around the airport. The MAC often observes the same flight generating sound events at multiple RMT. Enclosed on pages 27-28 is the MAC’s mobile monitor request form. More information about the process for requesting mobile monitoring is available on the MAC website at http://www.macnoise.com/our-neighbors/mobile-noise-monitoring. The ARC, as part of the 2018-2019 work plan, could make a recommendation to the City Council to evaluate the option of requesting a mobile noise monitor to determine if gaps exist in the current coverage. It is important to note that the RMT system is completely separate from the noise mitigation program. Lastly, Ms. Nelson shared the analysis included on pages 29-43 describing the process taken for selecting the sites for the new remote monitoring towers that were installed prior to the construction of Runway 17/35. X.ADJOURNMENT Per the request of the Commission, the Eagan ARC meetings will go no later than 8:30 p.m. unless agreed upon by the Commission. /s/Dianne E. Miller_______ Assistant City Administrator 3 Airport Town Hall Meeting January 14, 2016 Eagan Community Center 4 Welcome to the Town Hall Meeting Chuck Thokildson, Chairperson of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission (ARC) Introduction of ARC members Mayor’s Welcoming Remarks 5 Introduction of our Panel Dana Nelson—Metropolitan Airports Commission, Manager: Noise, Environment & Planning Justin Wulf—Operations Manager, MSP Air Traffic Control Tower Gordon Goss—Delta Chief Pilot 6 Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) Aviation Noise Program Information website: macnoise.com File a noise complaint Replay flight tracks Access studies and reports View information videos Subscribe for news updates Check our calendar of events MAC Staff: Manager Noise Environment and Planning, Assistant Manager, GIS Coordinator, Acoustics & Technical Systems Coordinator, Noise Coordinator Metropolitan Airports Commission Noise and Operations Monitoring System: A system of 39 Remote Monitoring Towers, Noise events matched with flight tracks to collect operations and noise data. 7 MINNEAPOLIS AIRPORT TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER (MSP ATCT) MSP is ranked 16th busiest airport in the nation with over 400,000 operations per year. MSP Tower and Tracon staffed 24/7 by over 120 controllers, management and support personnel. Primary duty is to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic. Safe –Ensuring aircraft separation and system safety in the air and on the ground Orderly –Applying air traffic control rules to ensure system integrity Expeditious –Maintaining an efficient throughput of arrivals and departures, keeping demand and capacity in balance 8 Bob P. asked: My decorations are shaking from planes flying low over my home. It would really help if the planes got higher more quickly. Does the FAA have any authority to require pilots to hit certain altitudes within a set distance? 9 Aircraft Altitude Aircraft altitude on departure is variable dependent on a number of factors: Type of aircraft and performance characteristics Weight Air temperature and humidity (aircraft do not gain altitude as quickly on hot days compared to cold days) Flight manual procedures of the air carriers Controlled airspace considerations 10 Mary J. asked: At times, it seems planes fly over my house every 10 seconds. What kind of spacing requirements does the FAA have for planes departing one after another? 11 Aircraft Spacing Air Traffic Controllers line up aircraft with safe spacing for landing and schedule safely spaced departures between landings. The size of the separation depends on the size and speed of aircraft and the amount of turbulence caused by the aircraft. Air Traffic Controllers need to consider vertical, horizontal and lateral distances between aircraft. 12 Steve A. asked: I’ve heard the MAC has completed all of their noise mitigation around the airport. Is there any way to still qualify for mitigation? 13 MAC Residential Noise Mitigation Program Under a new Residential Noise Mitigation Program, eligibility of single-family and multi-family homes will be determined annually, based upon actual noise contours that are developed each March for the preceding calendar year. In order for a home to be eligible, it has to be located, for 3 consecutive years in the actual 60-64 DNL noise contour and within a higher noise impact mitigation area when compared to the previous Residential Noise Mitigation Program. Currently, no homes in Eagan are eligible for Residential Noise Mitigation. 14 15 Lisa N. asked: I live near Yankee Doodle and Coachman in Eagan. About 9 pm every night some plane or helicopter flies over, shines a light, and startles me and my cat who are trying to sleep. Is this the police, or a cargo or commercial plane, or what? I have lived in the same place for 3 years and it occurs most nights. I don't have a problem with noise but the light startles us. 16 Flights near Yankee Doodle and Coachman For safety purposes, lights on aircraft are turned on when aircraft land and takeoff at an airport Lights from both cargo and commercial flights arriving and departing from MSP may be causing your concerns The MAC Noise Program Office can look into specific flights using its Noise and Operations Monitoring System Contact MAC at 612/726-9411 or visit macnoise.com Give us the exact date and time and we can look into the flight activity in your area to help explain what is occurring Flight information is also provided on an interactive Flight Tracker application, available at https://www.macnoise.com/tools-reports/flighttracker 17 Craig W. asked: I used to live by Lake Nokomis. I now live 10 miles away in Eagan and the noise is just as bad. Why? 18 Dynamics in Airport Operations and Noise Impact Variations in airport configuration, runway use, flight profiles and weather conditions may lead to differing aircraft operations and resultant noise impact from one area to another. Additionally, the subjective nature of noise leads to varying personal experiences and perceptions. You may contact the MAC and provide your specific location information for a more detailed look into the flight activity in your current home compared to your previous home. 19 Jeff C. asked: Are there certain hours of the day where airplanes are not allowed to fly over our neighborhoods? 20 Flight Restrictions No. According to the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of 1990, no airport may impose an access restriction that unduly burdens interstate commerce.Since MSP is a public use facility, it must be available for use 24 hours per day. Some airports, such as San Diego International Airport and John Wayne Airport, implemented operational restrictions based on noise before the 1990 ANCA; therefore, those restrictions were grandfathered in and are allowed under federal guidelines. The MAC has, however, implemented a voluntary agreement for late night and early morning flights at MSP (between10:30 pm and 6:00 am). Letters were recently sent to MSP carriers highlighting the sensitive nature of nighttime flights and requesting that, when possible, carriers refrain from scheduling operations during the nighttime hours. 21 Carol S. asked: Are certain runways used depending on where the plane is going? For example, do all planes flying to Atlanta come over Eagan? 22 Los Angeles Las Vegas Dallas Kansas City Denver Chicago Memphis Birmingha m Indianapo lis Seattle Bozeman Anchorag e New York Boston Detroit Philadelphi a Washingto n D.C. Orlando 23 Questions for our panel? Please use the microphone to ask your questions as this meeting is being recorded for Eagan Television. Thank you! 24 Thank You for Joining Us and Enjoy Your Evening Questions? Visit macnoise.com Call the MAC Noise Hotline at 612/726- 9411 Call Dianne Miller, Assistant City Administrator, at 675-5014 or email ARC@cityofeagan.com 25 26 Date of Request _________________________ Indicate the address and describe where the requested mobile noise monitoring would take place MAC Mobile Noise Monitoring Request Form Name of Community Member Submitting Request Name of NOC Representative Submitting Request Describe why noise monitoring data already collected by the MAC are not adequate to meet the stated goal of the mobile noise monitoring request (attach additional sheet if necessary) Define the goal of the requested mobile noise monitoring (attach additional sheet if necessary) Indicate the location of the RMT located closest to the requested mobile noise monitoring request location Define the specific community that will benefit from the requested mobile noise monitoring (size, etc.) Evaluation of Mobile Noise Monitoring Request (Completed by MAC Staff) Request was received from a current NOC member: Yes No The goal of the mobile noise monitoring is well-defined: Yes No The goal of the mobile noise monitoring is realistically achievable: Yes No Mobile noise monitoring will benefit a large section of the community that is suffering the effects of un- usual aircraft noise events that are difficult to monitor: Yes No Current noise monitoring data being collected are inadequate for the requested analysis: Yes No MAC recommendation to conduct mobile noise monitoring: Yes No Please mail completed request form to: MAC Noise Program Office, 6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 27 —-MAC Use Only—- Comments Regarding Evaluation of Mobile Noise Monitoring Request: NOC Representative: Yes No The goal of the mobile noise monitoring is well-defined: Yes No The goal of the mobile noise monitoring is realistically achievable: Yes No Mobile noise monitoring will benefit a large section of the community that is suffering the effects of unusual aircraft noise events that are difficult to monitor: Yes No Current noise monitoring data being collected are inadequate for the requested analysis: Yes No Name(s) and title(s) of MAC staff conducting evaluation: Date: 28 Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport Runway 17-35 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Remote Noise Monitoring Tower Location Process and Analysis By Chad E. Leqve, MAC ANOMS Coordinator June 19, 2001 29 In order to fulfill the Metropolitan Airports Commission’s (MAC) commitment to communities south of the airport to install remote noise monitoring towers associated with the new north-south runway, MAC staff began the process of siting new noise monitoring locations relative to Runway 17-35 in March 2001. To this end, the Runway 17-35 Remote Noise Monitoring Tower (RMT) Location Task Force, comprised of representatives from the cities of Bloomington, Eagan, Burnsville and Apple Valley, was established. The intent of the Task Force was to ensure community involvement relative to the establishment of the new Airport Noise & Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS) Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) locations. In review, the Minnesota State Legislature, in 1996, directed the MAC to continue the development of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) at its current location. As a result of the associated noise impacts of this decision, the legislation included provisions for the formation of a Noise Mitigation Committee. The Committee was charged with investigating specific operational and procedural activities that would assist with the overall management of noise around the airport. Through the deliberations of the Noise Mitigation Committee, the MSP Noise Mitigation Program was developed. The program outlined various mitigation options including measures focusing on sound insulation, community stabilization, airport operations and runway use. One initiative outlined in the program included the installation of additional ANOMS RMT’s. The intent was to provide more noise monitoring coverage of actual impacts in the vicinity of the airport. This included two specific elements, (1) possible locations affected by the parallel runways (to monitor continued growing volumes of air traffic) and (2) the addition of new monitors in areas that will be affected by the future operation of Runway 17-35. In 1998, the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) focused on increasing the noise monitoring coverage of ANOMS predicated on existing runway geometry and associated operational patterns. The analysis resulted in the addition of five new monitoring towers bringing the total number of monitors up to 29. Through a thorough and objective process, MASAC established the location of the new sites via the use of objective data sets, which enhanced the system’s ability to measure aircraft overflight noise impacts in residential areas. The analysis was predicated on requirements that were established as part of the initial system installation, in addition to further data consideration and the utilization of increased spatial analysis capabilities. Consistent with the previous RMT additions to ANOMS, the location of the new Runway 17-35 RMT’s considers the same data sets, to the greatest extent possible, as available through the application of the same analytical methodology. The primary criteria, as used in the previous installations, applied throughout the siting process for the new Runway 17-35 RMT’s. These primary criteria include the following: 30 ??Located to monitor the majority of operations at MSP – in this case, relative to operations South of MSP on Runway 17-35 (This process was refined multiple times to account for both arrival and departure operations. Aircraft flight paths were considered during both the siting of the twenty-four original sites and the addition of the five sites in 1999.) ??Must be located within 100 feet of electrical power ??Must be located on public property Consistent with the first point above, appropriate location areas were established predicated on the analysis methodology precedence set relative to previous RMT sitings. In an effort to maximize the location of the five new RMT’s that were installed in 1999, MAC staff conducted the analysis predicated on the following information. ??RMT buffer areas as determined relative to the existing coverage of the 24 RMT sites ??Search area development, defined by a two mile buffer around the EIS 2005 DNL 60 contour ??Land use analysis to enhance coverage in areas that are predominately residential ??Flight track analysis utilizing one week of flight track data from each quarter to assess the number of RMT buffer areas that each flight track penetrated. The intent was to minimize the number of flight tracks that did not go through a RMT buffer area. Although the process for establishing the new RMT locations relative to Runway 17-35 was predicated on the same analysis methodology as the previous RMT siting analysis, in some cases alternate data sources had to be used due to the unavailability of Runway 17- 35 flight track information. Below are the various data sets that were used as part of the Runway 17-35 RMT siting analysis. ??RMT buffer areas as determined relative to the existing coverage of the 29 RMT sites (includes the five new sites which were added in 1999)1 ??Site search area, defined by a two mile buffer around the 2000 Part 150 Update 2005 Mitigated 60 DNL contour to the South and West, the Runway 17 end point to the North and Pilot Knob Road to the East ??Land use analysis to enhance coverage in areas that are predominantly residential ??Grid point analysis incorporating Integrated Noise Model (INM) DNL values at each point as calculated in the development process for the 2000 Part 150 Update 2005 Mitigated 60 DNL Contour 2 1 Due to the fact that the noise monitoring coverage of each existing RMT is equal to or greater than the distance to the next closest RMT, the size of the RMT buffers were determined by using the mean distance from one RMT to the next closest RMT, which is 5,767 feet. This is used to develop the RMT buffers by establishing a radius of 2,883.5 feet, which represents a halving of 5,767 feet. An RMT buffer does not represent the device’s noise monitoring coverage capabilities, but rather is used to evaluate potential RMT placement locations. 2 Grid points were established at 2,883.5 feet of separations, which is equidistant to the established RMT buffer radius. At each of the grid points an INM DNL value was calculated relative to the 2000 Part 150 Update 2005 Mitigated Contour criteria. The points comprise a grid and each grid cell was assigned a DNL value, which was the average of the DNL values that were calculated at the four corner points of each grid cell. 31 ??Weighted INM flight track impact analysis predicated on the INM flight tracks used in the development process for the 2000 Part 150 Update 2005 Mitigated 60 DNL Contour 3 Through the use of MAC’s Geographical Information Systems (GIS) program, the various data sets were assembled. Following Task Force endorsement of the methodology, the analysis was conducted in an effort to establish the best RMT location areas. By defining a search area relative to the two-mile contour buffer area, and further refining the search area to residential land uses, the effectiveness of RMT buffer location areas was maximized. Through the application of a DNL grid point analysis coupled with INM flight track impact information, the RMT buffer areas were placed in a way that maximizes the coverage of the most impacted areas as determined by the grid impact analysis. The analysis yielded ten new RMT locations south of Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. By placing the RMT buffers in a manner which prov ided the best coverage in the highest impact areas, ten RMT siting areas were established – three in Bloomington, two in Burnsville, one in Apple Valley and four in Eagan. The RMT buffer areas were sent to each respective city for the exact location determination within the task force approved buffer area locations. MAC staff facilitated review by the respective city councils and as a result, all of the final RMT locations have been endorsed and approved by the respective councils. Please refer to the attached maps for specific RMT site locations. On August 20, 2001 the contract will be awarded facilitating the commencement of construction on or around August 27, 2001. Depending on the equipment manufacturing time, the concrete foundations and utility runs may be completed prior to the receipt of the poles and associated equipment. As a result, the project completion date will be contingent on the acquisition of the needed equipment. It is anticipated that the project will be completed by December 31, 2001 3 Each Runway 17 -35 INM flight track, south of the airport, that was used for the generation of the 2000 Part 150 Update 2005 Mitigated Contour was considered. To account for flight track spread around the core and sub departure flight tracks, a track buffer was developed for the core and sub tracks that is equal to the average of the sub track distances left and right of the core track as the tracks exit the search area. The Runway 35 arrival track buffer was established by analyzing existing arrival operations on the parallel runways and assessing their deviation left and right of runway centerline as they approach the airport. A weighting value was applied to each departure track buffer such that the number of operations along an INM flight track is distributed consistent with the Runway 17 departure sub track allocation assumptions in the 2005 Mitigated Contour. The Runway 35 INM arrival track is comprised of a single core track, therefore no distribution was necessary. By assigning a cumulative flight track impact value (relative to the number of operations on the respective tracks) to each cell and combining that with the average of the INM DNL values associated with the four points that comprise the grid cell corners, an overall grid cell value can be determined. Flight track impact weighting valu es per each track buffer were assigned to each grid cell that was completely within or touched by a particular track buffer. Furthermore, the various grid DNL values were divided by a factor of ten to maintain the overflight impact variable as the dominate determining factor. As a result of combining the INM track and DNL information, placement of the RMT buffer areas was done in a manner that maximizes coverage of the most impacted areas, independent of actual ANOMS flight track data. 32 33 Southeast corner of River Ridge Playground at 8715 River Ridge Road RMT Location 34 West side of Running Park located at 12th Avenue and East Old Shakopee Road RMT Location 35 Northwest corner of Pleasant Playlot at 10325 Pleasant Avenue South RMT Location 36 Located in the northeast corner of North River Hills Community Park RMT Location 37 Located in the southwest corner of Red Oak Community Park RMT Location 38 2100 Garnet Lane, southeast corner on Diamond Drive –located in city right of way RMT Location 39 City property located north and east of Scout Pond –situated in the Briar Oaks addition RMT Location 40 4399 Woodgate Lane north, southeast corner – located in city right of way RMT Location 41 3957 Turquoise Circle, southwest corner on Turquoise Trail –located in city right of way RMT Location 42 3477 St. Charles Place, northwest corner on Coachman Road –located in city right of way RMT Location 43