CAA: GA News, "A solution to air-noise pollution? ; FAA pitches idea to solve Flying Cloud runway dispute"

["Stephen Irwin" <stepheni@xxxxxxxxx>]

February 26, 2002

A solution to air-noise pollution? ; FAA pitches idea to solve Flying
Cloud runway dispute
The Minneapolis (MN) Star-Tribune


A surprise proposal by federal aviation officials could result in an
agreement to keep relatively noisy planes from using an expanded runway
at Flying Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie.

The idea from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) could help
resolve a political and environmental issue that has divided Eden
Prairie and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC).

Eden Prairie residents and the City Council have worried that the
planned expansion of two of Flying Cloud's runways could allow greater
use by planes known in the aviation industry as Stage 2 aircraft. That
concern increased when the FAA objected last year to a 1978 MAC
ordinance that bans flights at Flying Cloud by planes weighing 20,000
pounds or more. That restriction has kept most Stage 2 flights from
using Flying Cloud.

Many large Stage 2 planes, including 727s and DC-9s used by the nation's
airlines, were phased out by the end of 1999. Others were equipped with
so-called hush kits to reduce their noise enough to meet federal
standards. But smaller Stage 2 planes still operate around the country.

Tim Anderson, the MAC's deputy executive director for operations, said
Monday that the FAA has proposed allowing the MAC to ban Stage 2 flights
on the longest of Flying Cloud's three runways - 5,000 feet after
expansion - but allowing them on the next longest runway - 3,900 feet
after expansion.

Anderson said that few, if any, Stage 2 planes would use the 3,900- foot
runway because they could not fly profitably with light-enough loads to
use the shorter strip safely.

Richard Rosow, Eden Prairie's city attorney, said the FAA proposal would
have "substantially the same impact as a grandfathered ban" on Stage 2
planes like the one that has been in place for nearly 24 years.

The FAA proposal is surprising because the agency usually resists
efforts to restrict access to the nation's airports. But Anderson said
it helps that other MAC airports in the Twin Cities area can accommodate
Stage 2 planes and that the ban on using Flying Cloud's long runway
would not be linked to aircraft weight, which the FAA views as
discriminatory.

"There is no relationship between weight and noise," he said. Newer
planes called Stage 3 can carry heavier loads but generate fewer
decibels than Stage 2 planes.

Rosow said talks are continuing to make sure the FAA's idea is
enforceable. He said he hopes that an agreement can be presented to the
MAC and the City Council next month.

Anderson called that timetable "aggressive" but said that he, too, wants
to move ahead quickly. The MAC has extended its deadline for receiving
comments about the environmental impact of the airport expansion to the
end of March.

Meanwhile, opponents of Flying Cloud expansion are seeking to introduce
resolutions at March 5 precinct caucuses to back such measures as
reserving land for a new airport, greater legislative oversight of MAC
spending and greater noise insulation and compensation for people living
near the MAC's airports.


   Post your opinion on this story in the CAA General Aviation Forum
http://www.californiaaviation.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?conf=DCConfID2

*****************************************