Unhappy homeowners spur compromise on MSP air traffic shift

  • Article by: PAT DOYLE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: June 7, 2013 - 10:16 PM

Commissioners compromise on plan for major shift in MSP flight patterns.

  • 59
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
EleanoreNov. 19, 12 8:42 AM

To my eyes, the new plan looks less eqitable, it increases impact on some areas but reduces the number of areas impacted. I'd suggest living in the city anywhere near the airport should subject everyone to as similar levels of noise as possible rather than shift them primarily onto a few. Overall, disbanning the mac and regulating the airport through elected public officials while privatizing it (and capturing the taxes they should be paying for their profit) would be the most responsible and just thing state officials could do.

22
31
timandtiaNov. 19, 12 9:09 AM

It might be time to really, really think about building a new airport outside of the Twin Cities. I use to live in New Hope and sometimes I could hear the airplanes. The current airport is just to close to the Metropolitan area. In the "old days" the airport was in a good area, but times have changed with development, therefore, the airport has to change by moving. Simple..

30
46
jamgraNov. 19, 12 9:10 AM

Don't be surprised if the FAA tries to justify this with buzzwords like "safety". They know that there is no better way to get people to go along with something against their interests than to claim that it's more "safe" without actually proving that it is so or that there aren't other ways of achieving that safety. The FAA has no clue about the nature of the communities and neighborhoods surrounding the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. They are trying to push through these airplane superhighways that will put 120 flights on narrow tracks through heavily populated residential neighborhoods to save a few bucks on fuel. This isn't an appropriate plan for Minneapolis or Edina. The residents were left out of the decision-making process. Our representatives need to save the communities they were elected to represent.

45
22
beveryafraidNov. 19, 12 9:27 AM

Please, people, no more "you knew there was an airport there, so it's your own fault" comments.

52
56
joe_mnNov. 19, 12 9:27 AM

haha. thats funny. loud opposition. like the noise from the airplanes. is that a clever headline?

17
4
dpbeyerNov. 19, 12 9:48 AM

Most of the news seems to focus on Edina & Mpls - my wife & I live in Eagan off of Cedar Avenue under the North/South runway and the estimations are we could hear close to 300 takeoffs/day over our place. So this new plan affects way more people than the articles seems to be showing.

57
4
jamgraNov. 19, 12 9:49 AM

How could anyone reading these comments be opposed to these people just wanting to keep their neighborhoods, Minneapolis and Edina, free from an airplane superhighway? They simply want equitable sharing of the flight noise across the metro and the continued livability of their neighborhoods. As Minnesotans, we all have an interest in this.

58
19
reader2580Nov. 19, 1210:43 AM

Didn't we settle the expand current airport versus build a new one years ago? The airport is one of several reasons I have no plans to ever live in the south metro area.

22
3
barbjensNov. 19, 1211:13 AM

Maybe they are right but it is like Edina would like the planes ANYWHERE but over their area. I think Eagan and parts of Burnsville have lived with this for years. How about sharing???

56
13
barbjensNov. 19, 1211:14 AM

Edina was happy and OK with the planes being involved over Eagan and parts of Burnsville.

56
15

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT