Local politicians weigh in on airport noise flap

  • Article by: PAT DOYLE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: January 12, 2013 - 12:07 AM

While supporting a compromise that delays re-routing planes, Minnesota members of Congress stop short of opposing the plan.

  • 10
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 10 of 10
jamgraJan. 11, 13 9:10 PM

The problem with the FAA's proposal was that it took 100 daily flights from Richfield and concentrated them on superhighways over dense residential neighborhoods in Southwest Minneapolis and Edina. This would be an extremely unfair shift of noise onto people that bought their homes based on the previous traffic patterns. If the flight paths are going to be implemented over Minneapolis, the maximum number of flights need to put over Hwy 62 over their already existing flight path, so as little as possible changes. After that, the remaining flights need to be shared equitably across as many flight paths as possible over Minneapolis so we all share in the noise burden from the airport. I don't think anyone wants these planes to continually hammer any one group of people, especially people that bought their homes based on the existing air traffic patterns. That wouldn't be good for our city or our neighborhoods.

10
2
thedanmanJan. 12, 13 5:58 AM

IMO, it's political pandering to the sheeples. In the end, no one will notice the 2% noise shift in either direction and hundreds of thousands of your tax dollars have be wasted to pander to the 'victims'. If you've really taken an objective view of the situation, you'll understand. If you're NIMBY-ish and looking at "numbers/percentages" vs realistic noise decibles - as most rational thinking householes have been in the affected situation - then I expect not.

0
5
barbjensJan. 12, 13 6:52 AM

Do all cities/airports have this problem??? Does NY, Chicago, etc. have to "placate" the people by adjusting how the planes take-off or do they operate under different considerations?

3
3
kwirkyJan. 12, 13 6:55 AM

I think jamgra has it nailed

3
2
panemanJan. 12, 13 7:45 AM

Egan, South Minneapolis and Mendota Heights have been bombarded with airport noise for years. No one was ever concerned about those communities. No, it was only when Edina was going to get a few more flights that made it unfair. Guess where the money and influence is folks.

9
1
clnorthJan. 12, 13 8:19 AM

I don't see a problem. The Federal Government never makes mistakes.

0
5
stingballJan. 12, 13 8:50 AM

I have lived in Richfield for 18 years and have always had a flight path almost directly over my house. I knew this when I bought the house and have basically been able to live with it up until about 2 or 3 years ago. That is when there was a near mid-air collision of jets at the airport, and as a result alot more air traffic was routed over my house than was the case the previous 15 years. So me and my neighbors are getting pounded every day, and just when the FAA offers a plan to give us some much needed relief, Edina rears its ugly head and puts a stop to it, using their considerable political influence. I guess Edinans want "low rent" people in Richfield to get all the airplane noise so they don't have to get any noise. God forbid Edina property values go down even 1% because of airplane noise. Edina, we will be ready the next time this issue comes up and will not let you push us around.

6
1
northhillJan. 12, 1310:24 AM

Barbjens, Park Ridge Illinois deals with noise from O'Hare which is more severe than any area of the Twin Cities.It still is an affluent and attractive Chicago suburb which is very close to O'Hare.It has contended with constant noise from aircraft for years.Why do people still buy houses in Park Ridge? Because it is a nice place to live among others.The same can be said of Edina, Eagan, and other suburbs close to the airport.The Twin Cities airport has seen commercial jet operations since 1961,fifty two years ago.Only a handfull of American cities have built new airports since the 1940's.Maybe it is time to consider it here.It won't happen because most people like the airport right where it is including those who complain about noise.

4
0
fawnhallJan. 12, 13 2:32 PM

Safety should be the overriding concern here. If, there is a crash I expect everyone to remember Klobuchar, Franken, and Paulsen were the ones to delay this proposal. Not for safety reasons but, because they did not want to offend affluent voters/contributors.

2
3
dtmonkeyboyJan. 13, 13 7:15 PM

I don't live near the airport but I used to. Sharing the noise among everyone means that you maybe get 20 flights per day that are bad. If this "super highway" plan is implemented the MAC will basically be routing 100 flights over some homes. Is that fair? What if we shut down the highways and routed all the cars down your street...would you have a right to complain.

2
2
  • 1 - 10 of 10

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

ADVERTISEMENT