SMAAC Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 17, 2018, 12:24:52 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
429 Posts in 235 Topics by 1922 Members
Latest Member: DominicC52
Home Help Search Login Register
+  SMAAC Forums
|-+  SMAAC NEWS BLOGS
| |-+  Autumn 2017 E-NewsLetter
| | |-+  SMAAC Wants a PUBLIC MSP Meeting
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Reply Send this topic Print
Author Topic: SMAAC Wants a PUBLIC MSP Meeting  (Read 634 times)
Forum Manager
Administrator
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 51

« on: November 22, 2016, 02:12:38 PM »
Reply with quote

The first "discussion" of the MSP Annual Assessment of Environmental Effects (AOEE) is now scheduled December 05, 2016 at 10:30 AM, the MAC Planning, Development & Environment Committee (PD&E) meeting.

 We'd bet a bundle that the questions we asked (below) will not be answered and that our testimony at the AOEE Hearing will be disputed by MAC staff. 

Health risks, safety and noise distrubance in South Minneapolis are not considered issues because so few people showed up at the election-eve AOEE/CIP
"Public Hearing. If you think they are important, the next step is to demand that these critical meetings be opened up and held on an accessible site
for a reasonable time
.
 
Call Steve Cramer, the PD&E Chair 612-656-3811,
the Governor [651-201-3400] and
Email MAC Chair Dan Boivin at dan.bovin@mspmac.org.

SMAAC notes that the flight forecasts and other numbers and financing topics in the last (2010) MSP Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) were modified in August 2015. The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is required by law to submit a LTCP Update every 5 years to the Metropolitan Council as part of the Metro Transportation Policy Plan (TPP).
Why hasn't that been done?

Each year, Met Council reviews the MSP Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), for the next 7 years and approves the next year's CIP projects as consistent with the TPP. However, the 2016-2023 CIP affects flight capacity at MSP, but now the forecasts differ compared to those included in the 2010 Environmental Review and the 2011-2018 CIP.
Which CIP was applied by Met Council for 2016 projects?

What will be the basis for the 2017 CIP approvals when the 2017 projects are approved?


 Why is this important?
In brief, no noise map changes delayed planning after the September 2010 and subsequent air traffic control changes, perhaps because monthly changes in routes and runway use, if modeled, would dispute the noise maps evaluated for the 2010 Environmental Review and the annual MAC reviews. The MAC said that the July 2013 Converging Runways Safety Warning, they were sure, could be clarified to safely allow more arrivals per hour and operations would be little different than in the July 2013 to June 2014 (12 months) and OK for 2015-2016 planning purposes. The CRO Safety Order was issued 1 July 2015.
 MSP is still waiting for those changes. SMAAC and the Met Council have only this information: no changes are now anticipated until late next year. SMAAC, however, has information that the FAA Office of Safety is unlikely to increase arrivals without limiting departures.

This limitation surely affects MSP Long-Term planning, more so because the MAC approved MSP flight forecasts in 2015 projecting more use of MSP in later years (2022 to 2030) than forecast in 2010 for those years. SMAAC submitted LTCP and CIP Comments in 2014 repeated for the 2015 CIP expecting the CRO Order, and at the November 2016 Hearing before the Planning, Development and Environment Committee. We will repeat the need to deal with the LTCP Update and the FAA Environmental Hearing at the December MAC Meeting (2017 budget approvals).

 
« Last Edit: November 29, 2016, 10:49:16 PM by Forum Manager » Logged
Forum Manager
Administrator
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 51

« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2016, 10:45:19 PM »
Reply with quote

NOTE: According to the Met Council staff, the City of Minneapolis and the MAC informally asked for a 6-month delay “so that runway use (route) changes could be recorded for 60 (winter days) and a more accurate noise exposure map published.).”  The request by Minneapolis was related to the Consent Decree “actual 2015 noise contours” used to determine noise mitigation eligibility.  The MAC expected that routes and procedures reducing maximum arrivals at MSP per hour due to the CRO Order would be revised by January 2016.
Logged
Battista
Newbie
*
Posts: 1

« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2017, 11:23:19 AM »
Reply with quote

Any recent updates on this?
Logged
Forum Manager
Administrator
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 51

« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2017, 05:29:30 PM »
Reply with quote

This site (URL) is still accessible because a ghost version exists somewhere in the cloud, probably a host back-up.

THe URL at the URL www.quiettheskies.org/ redirects to www.smaacmn.org  , but if you use http://www.quiettheskies.org/smaacforum/index.php? or a cached home page and the button to smaacforum, you found this version.

We're not sure how but our Administrator log-in still works to post, but we cannot check if this reply appears at the ghost site or not.

So ... please use www.smaacmn.org.   a Forum equivalent there is a NEWS blog.

jim spensley
Logged
Pages: [1] Reply Send this topic Print 
« previous next »
 

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 2.0 RC3 | SMF © 2006–2010, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!