In airport noise fight, loud cities win

  • Article by: PAT DOYLE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: November 24, 2012 - 9:34 PM

Residents of Minneapolis and Edina mobilized and lobbied to keep plane noise out of their back yards. The ruling to delay a new FAA flight pattern came at the expense of Richfield.

  • 23
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
roymercerNov. 24, 1210:06 PM

MAC and the FAA live in mortal fear of Edina.

10
5
FrankLNov. 24, 1211:02 PM

This is only a temporary delay, the FAA is committed to GPS navigation, which means planes will go in very discrete flight paths.

9
5
stingballNov. 25, 1212:46 AM

As a Richfield resident, this article angers me in that it seems like ill-informed but aggressive Edina residents kept a good thing from happening that would have provided needed noise relief to Richfield. It seems like this proposal probably would not have hurt Edina but actually helped reduce overall noise levels there. Reminds me how the loudest voices in our society, though often wrong, seem to usually get their way.

12
8
corngo4rNov. 25, 12 7:10 AM

People in Mpls. and Edina better get rid of their refrigerators, stop having converasations and make a protect for people driving on their street because that is the range of noise levels according to the report. Numbers are just numubers unless put into context.

4
7
barbjensNov. 25, 12 7:22 AM

I agree with stingball. Edina has the NIMBT attitude. The rest of the area has to put up with the noise and probably by the time the planes got over Edina they would be at an altitude that the noise would not be that great. I have planes going over my house (Burnsville) but having the airport where it is is better than having it moved to some "distant" area.

10
6
dbrauerNov. 25, 12 7:44 AM

Just a note: Minneapolis wasn't trying to shut out airport noise, they were trying to spread it. It's baffling to me why the FAA would be allowed to concentrate takeoff s from the two northwest-facing runways over a fairly small band of the city. Kingfield got slammed way more than before, Linden Hills barely touched. Corridors are fine but more distance between them and more traffic spread amongst them (to avoid 72-plane-per-day peaks) essential.

12
2
wolves46Nov. 25, 12 8:02 AM

We live a few blocks North of Crosstown in SW Minnneapolis in a neighborhood that has never received MAC noise abatement. This isn't a case of NiMBY, it's a case of Not JUST in My BackYard.

16
1
oldganderNov. 25, 12 8:48 AM

Jets have been operating out of MSP since 1960 or before. 52 years ago. Anyone who bought a house after that date should not have their house sound proofed by the taxpayer nor should they complain basically about where they live and the mistake they made by buying there.

6
14
yoymrdoeNov. 25, 12 8:55 AM

The people should get Klobuchar and Frankin involved. Take the issue up with the new state house and senate.

1
1
teddygNov. 25, 12 9:10 AM

Folks, 18 years ago the decision was made to disperse take-offs. This is because those same households were affected by both takeoff traffic and landing traffic. Both of which followed very discrete paths. By dispersing takeoffs, it offered some relief to those households. Made perfect sense. Now the FAA wants to go back to discreet takeoff paths. And the path for runway 24R follows the same identical footprint as landings on 12L. This is the single most active runway at the airport. Sort of 'double your fun' for those households. For no good reason. I can't blame those homeowners for saying the Airport Commission broke its promise.

9
3

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