Airport director and activists go nose to nose on noise

To a political hack used to judging the success of a public meeting by counting bodies in chairs, the November 20 South Metro Airport Action Council forum headlining MAC Executive Director Jeff Hamiel as featured guest would have been a bust; Only 35 people attended the gathering.

But, those few who were there happened to comprise a who's who list of dedicated, educated and seasoned Southside noise activists, including Southside legislators Jean Wagenius and Jane Ranum, former legislator Mark Gleason and Southside activist icon Dick Saunders. And, they took full advantage of the rare opportunity to go one on one over noise issues with the airport's top gun.

Hamiel acknowledged the smallish but veteran audience, stating “any opportunity we have to talk to the community is definitely worthwhile,” and offered his opinion that from the MAC’s perspective, the airport's noise program is the best in the country.

Hamiel framed his comments by summarizing major decisions during the last 14 years that have shaped today's noise and expansion issues: In 1989, the legislature passed the airport “Dual Track” planning act which was to assess and compare all conceivable impacts of expanding MSP at its present site and building a much larger airport well away from residential neighborhoods; From 1989 to 1996 the Metropolitan Council conducted that study which Hamiel described as “extensive and exhaustive” in fulfillment of the Dual Track mandate; In 1996, the MAC and Metropolitan Council concluded that the best decisions would be to expand MSP and nix any plans for a new airport. The legislature affirmed that decision, and put a new airport even further out of reach by making it illegal to set aside land for a new, larger facility.

So, noise is now, and probably forever will be, a vexing fact of life for Southsiders.
Hamiel confided that when he started with the MAC in 1977, nobody dreamed that by the turn of the century MSP would be the eighth busiest airport in the world. And he acknowledged that the biggest single problem in his 28 years at the airport has been, and still is, noise.

But Hamiel believes the airport has made an honest and sincere effort to manage noise impacts and offered points to support his opinion: The MAC has spent $250 million (or, merely the cost of about three new jets, according to one audience critic) for home and school noise insulation with more than 7,400 homes insulated so far; $150 million has been pledged to insulate homes beyond the DNL 65 contour where most other airports cut off insulation retrofitting. Hamiel claimed that at least 65 noise mitigation measures initiated at MSP have been adopted by airports across the United States, including “fanning” departures to spread noise as equitably as possible, and implementation of arrival and departure flight profiles to chip away at noise levels.

The ability to accurately measure noise—and more precisely determine where funds should be spent for mitigation— has been enhanced in recent years by the installation of a network of microphones around MSP. Hamiel stated that the electronic network has validated the credibility of noise estimates made preceding that system's installation by finding noise levels very close to those estimated by airport officials before electronic data was available. Further, Hamiel predicted that new noise contour lines to be published in January 2004 will not change significantly from the current version of noise contour charts.

The noise problem is not completely resolved by insulating homes, Hamiel admitted, but he still believes that in spite of some shortcomings the program has been very beneficial for residents and a worthwhile investment. Hamiel said that he hears comments that “noise levels today are worse than they have ever been” and opined that those complaints stem from the fact that while peak noise levels are down from the early jet era, exponential increases in air traffic have extended the hours of noise exposure significantly.

Hamiel predicted that noise will always be a problem unless a “sterilization” zone free of all incompatible land uses extending about eight miles from all the runways is established—something, of course, that would be impossible around MSP.
Legislator Jean Wagenius, who is concerned that low air traffic forecasts indicate a stagnating state economy, challenged Hamiel's confidence in the accuracy of MAC’s forecasts for future growth and reminded him that they had dismally underestimated operational forecasts in 1996 when the decision was made that a new airport wasn't needed. Hamiel responded that the FAA will approve their forecasts as an adequate justification for spending money on MSP expansion.

Former Southside legislator Mark Gleason—noting that a new airport could take decades to plan and build—asked Hamiel what will happen beyond the year 2020 when the airport will have run the course of its current planning scope. Hamiel responded that MSP will not suddenly reach the end of its functional capacity at that date, but flight delays may become a concern for airport users. Hamiel also offered his personal opinion that he would like to see an airport for the region with about 30,000 to 35,000 acres rather than the 3,200 in which MSP is now confined.

Former South Metro Airport Action Council president Dick Saunders asked both Hamiel and activists what could be done to derail Northwest Airline's Washington D.C.-based mission to kill the expanded noise insulation program mandated by the Legislature in 1996. Hamiel offered a glimmer of optimism by responding that the Metropolitan Council's directive to the MAC—to spend $150 million in completing that legislative directive—may thwart the airline's attempt to kill the program.