Strib article about airport noise is in
- 14 posts by
- Last post by Jason Stempel at 4:09pm, Sep 22, 2011
Keywords:
- noise
- airport
- flight
- mitigated
- MAC
"1,501 excessive noise "departures" recorded last month"
OMG. Thank G-D for this Strib article!!! Someone from S-E please hug Pat Doyle
next time you see him!
I'm in Standish. The change from previous years has been profound. The FAA's
little 'rule change' is effectively trashing our neighborhood's quality of
life.
We do NOT want these flights over our homes. Even if we are offered MAC
mitigation this is not what we literally bought in to.
The article said Sandy Colvin-Roy is now in the loop. Where's the mayor? This
is a BIG deal.
Time to fire up the attorneys. I'm dead serious. Sign me up.
Steve
On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Minke S wrote:
> Here it is:
> http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/130324373.html
>
>
> --
> Minke Holtkamp Sundseth
> Home: 612.721.6098
> Cell: 612.730.8312
>
> Minke Sundseth
>
> About Minke Sundseth: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/17uogUOq3nVbBDuRIPfa90
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/3nyQ0GiShC7X0x8J4jAhLx
>
> Special Feedback - Are the new forum rules working for you?
> http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1299
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls-staneric
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net
OMG. Thank G-D for this Strib article!!! Someone from S-E please hug Pat Doyle
next time you see him!
I'm in Standish. The change from previous years has been profound. The FAA's
little 'rule change' is effectively trashing our neighborhood's quality of
life.
We do NOT want these flights over our homes. Even if we are offered MAC
mitigation this is not what we literally bought in to.
The article said Sandy Colvin-Roy is now in the loop. Where's the mayor? This
is a BIG deal.
Time to fire up the attorneys. I'm dead serious. Sign me up.
Steve
On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Minke S wrote:
> Here it is:
> http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/130324373.html
>
>
> --
> Minke Holtkamp Sundseth
> Home: 612.721.6098
> Cell: 612.730.8312
>
> Minke Sundseth
>
> About Minke Sundseth: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/17uogUOq3nVbBDuRIPfa90
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/3nyQ0GiShC7X0x8J4jAhLx
>
> Special Feedback - Are the new forum rules working for you?
> http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1299
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls-staneric
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net
Who litigated this last time? That might be a good place to start.
The airport has promises to neighborhoods on all sides for who gets the traffic
and MAC mitigation and who does not. You don't just change your flight pattern
and trash neighborhoods without notification, hearings and proposals for add'l
mitigation.
I want to know who the person is who made this change on the sly only to leave
us with this problem. Whoever he or she is needs to be FIRED. I'm not kidding.
Ride him/her out on a rail.
This is unethical if not absolutely illegal. Because the airport cannot and
should not be trusted as a partner, this leaves surrounding neighborhoods no
choice but to defend ourselves with attorneys.
Sandy (and other CMs) and RT need to organize and mobilize on this issue. If
they don't then we should do it ourselves.
Steve
and MAC mitigation and who does not. You don't just change your flight pattern
and trash neighborhoods without notification, hearings and proposals for add'l
mitigation.
I want to know who the person is who made this change on the sly only to leave
us with this problem. Whoever he or she is needs to be FIRED. I'm not kidding.
Ride him/her out on a rail.
This is unethical if not absolutely illegal. Because the airport cannot and
should not be trusted as a partner, this leaves surrounding neighborhoods no
choice but to defend ourselves with attorneys.
Sandy (and other CMs) and RT need to organize and mobilize on this issue. If
they don't then we should do it ourselves.
Steve
I live in an affected area, and I'm in favor of the new flight paths now
that I know why the changes were made. I can live with more noise if it's
going to increase air safety.
The FAA and MAC could have done a much better job communicating with us
about this issue, though.
that I know why the changes were made. I can live with more noise if it's
going to increase air safety.
The FAA and MAC could have done a much better job communicating with us
about this issue, though.
I have been pretty annoyed by the planes but its nothing I cant deal with.
(as im writing this at 7:41am I just heard a plane buzz my house)
With that being said. I hope MAC will do something to change this up a bit. I
am more worried that if this is just the way it is, that some good neighbors
will move. This is a quality of life issue for sure.
(as im writing this at 7:41am I just heard a plane buzz my house)
With that being said. I hope MAC will do something to change this up a bit. I
am more worried that if this is just the way it is, that some good neighbors
will move. This is a quality of life issue for sure.
Dear neighbors.
I was hopeful that this article would instigate change. Instead, it is written
as a judicial sentence that we are just going go have to deal with our house
values, quality of health and life plummeting. I am not willing to let the
sentence stand. We are a community and we have power together. This is our
home. NO ONE has the right to violate the peace in our daily lives. It's nice
that our political representatives looked into the cause..now who is going to
question it and make change? So there was a near-collision last year. The most
valuable information in this article cites two other cities who handle a
substantially larger amount of flights without issues. Is it my responsibility
as a citizen of Minneapolis or our neighborhood's responsibility that this
nearly tragic mistake was made? Certainly, it is not. We can pretend to
acclimate or insist upon accountability and change.
I was hopeful that this article would instigate change. Instead, it is written
as a judicial sentence that we are just going go have to deal with our house
values, quality of health and life plummeting. I am not willing to let the
sentence stand. We are a community and we have power together. This is our
home. NO ONE has the right to violate the peace in our daily lives. It's nice
that our political representatives looked into the cause..now who is going to
question it and make change? So there was a near-collision last year. The most
valuable information in this article cites two other cities who handle a
substantially larger amount of flights without issues. Is it my responsibility
as a citizen of Minneapolis or our neighborhood's responsibility that this
nearly tragic mistake was made? Certainly, it is not. We can pretend to
acclimate or insist upon accountability and change.
Dear Neighbors,
After reading the Strib article and Sandra Colvin Roys email, I feel
outrage and a sense of hopelessness. If this is a permanent change and
something we have to deal with, then we should get some consideration from
the government agencies which are mandating this new flight pattern. I am
not happy about this, in fact, Im quite angry because I didnt move to this
neighborhood to be assaulted by aircraft noise most of my waking hours. The
lack of communication about this permanent change is especially
irritating.
In the most recent emails on this forum, there are some valid points being
made: (1) the timeframe used for the comparison of flights for the past
several years; (2) the criteria used for determining whose home gets noise
mitigation; (3) the options of filing a legal action and the last resort of
moving out of the area. I think we should look at all of these things.
I just have a couple questions which Ive asked MAC personnel in the past
but have never gotten a satisfactory answer. (1) Why is it necessary for
flights taking off on runway 30R (north parallel runway) to turn *north*? Why
cant they turn south, especially if runway 30L isnt being used (south
parallel runway)? And *why on earth isnt it being used*? Thats what Im
understanding from Sandra Colvin Roys email. (2) Whywhen theres no
perceptible wind or perhaps just a slight breezeis it necessary to send all
flights over the Standish-Ericsson neighborhood? There was a great deal of
noise over our neighborhood this past summer, when the wind generally is
from the southwest, so why are aircraft flying north? Sometimes theres no
wind at all, and they still take off from 30R and bank over S-E. Why not
just fly straight northwest, over the Bancroft neighborhood? How about
staggering the takeoffs so that no one neighborhood is affected
disproportionately? These may seem like nave questions, but to me theyre
just common sense.
I work for a law firm and dont particularly like the idea of a lawsuit, but
if thats what its going to take to get the attention of the FAA and MAC,
then I agree we should seriously consider it. Perhaps those of us who feel
particularly strongly about this issue should get together personally and
discuss it more thoroughly. Someone threw out the question of approaching
the law firm which handled the previous lawsuit for the folks south of
us. Thats
another good idea. That may be our only remedy outside of taking a major
financial loss on our homes and moving out of the neighborhood.
After reading the Strib article and Sandra Colvin Roys email, I feel
outrage and a sense of hopelessness. If this is a permanent change and
something we have to deal with, then we should get some consideration from
the government agencies which are mandating this new flight pattern. I am
not happy about this, in fact, Im quite angry because I didnt move to this
neighborhood to be assaulted by aircraft noise most of my waking hours. The
lack of communication about this permanent change is especially
irritating.
In the most recent emails on this forum, there are some valid points being
made: (1) the timeframe used for the comparison of flights for the past
several years; (2) the criteria used for determining whose home gets noise
mitigation; (3) the options of filing a legal action and the last resort of
moving out of the area. I think we should look at all of these things.
I just have a couple questions which Ive asked MAC personnel in the past
but have never gotten a satisfactory answer. (1) Why is it necessary for
flights taking off on runway 30R (north parallel runway) to turn *north*? Why
cant they turn south, especially if runway 30L isnt being used (south
parallel runway)? And *why on earth isnt it being used*? Thats what Im
understanding from Sandra Colvin Roys email. (2) Whywhen theres no
perceptible wind or perhaps just a slight breezeis it necessary to send all
flights over the Standish-Ericsson neighborhood? There was a great deal of
noise over our neighborhood this past summer, when the wind generally is
from the southwest, so why are aircraft flying north? Sometimes theres no
wind at all, and they still take off from 30R and bank over S-E. Why not
just fly straight northwest, over the Bancroft neighborhood? How about
staggering the takeoffs so that no one neighborhood is affected
disproportionately? These may seem like nave questions, but to me theyre
just common sense.
I work for a law firm and dont particularly like the idea of a lawsuit, but
if thats what its going to take to get the attention of the FAA and MAC,
then I agree we should seriously consider it. Perhaps those of us who feel
particularly strongly about this issue should get together personally and
discuss it more thoroughly. Someone threw out the question of approaching
the law firm which handled the previous lawsuit for the folks south of
us. Thats
another good idea. That may be our only remedy outside of taking a major
financial loss on our homes and moving out of the neighborhood.
We should be fired up and furious with the airport.
Do not be proud to share a weak, defeatist attitude that influences
complacency.
Unless a resident is legally deaf, this airplane noise is unbearable.
We need to gather together as a neighborhood and defeat the airport on this.
Do not be proud to share a weak, defeatist attitude that influences
complacency.
Unless a resident is legally deaf, this airplane noise is unbearable.
We need to gather together as a neighborhood and defeat the airport on this.
There must be someone with more neighborhood historical knowledge than me (I've
only lived here for 2 years) who can help us figure out who handled the
litigation the first time around that won mitigation for most of the
surrounding areas. I am definitely willing to help, but I don't practice law
in this area so we need that resource or to find someone who has some knowledge
of litigating against MAC (I don't have a ton of spare time to quickly become
an expert on this). Even if we don't sue, we need to figure out what the
options are.
We also need our elected officials to step up to the plate for us. There must
be some sort of compromise other than sending airplanes over a non-mitigated
area at the rate of 1 to 2 per minute for good chunks of the day.
only lived here for 2 years) who can help us figure out who handled the
litigation the first time around that won mitigation for most of the
surrounding areas. I am definitely willing to help, but I don't practice law
in this area so we need that resource or to find someone who has some knowledge
of litigating against MAC (I don't have a ton of spare time to quickly become
an expert on this). Even if we don't sue, we need to figure out what the
options are.
We also need our elected officials to step up to the plate for us. There must
be some sort of compromise other than sending airplanes over a non-mitigated
area at the rate of 1 to 2 per minute for good chunks of the day.
> Unless a resident is legally deaf, this airplane noise is unbearable.
That's a matter of opinion. I live very close to one of the MAC noise
monitors that people have been talking about and while the noise is a
nuisance, by no means is it "unbearable" for me.
> Do not be proud to share a weak, defeatist attitude that influences
complacency.
I've read this sentence a number of times and I can't make sense of it. Is
it an attempt at an insult?
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Jason Stempel
That's a matter of opinion. I live very close to one of the MAC noise
monitors that people have been talking about and while the noise is a
nuisance, by no means is it "unbearable" for me.
> Do not be proud to share a weak, defeatist attitude that influences
complacency.
I've read this sentence a number of times and I can't make sense of it. Is
it an attempt at an insult?
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Jason Stempel
---ATTENTION---
I just got a call from MPR News (Minneapolis Public Radio).
They are interested in our story.
They want to know what action -WE- are going to take next.
MPR wants me to keep them informed of our next steps.
We need some next steps.
I could really use some help from our pro-active neighborhood members to help
organize us. Any volunteers? Our voice and cause becomes magnified by having
media coverage. We need this.
I believe that all of us who are fed up with the airplane noise in our
neighborhoods need to gather together physically and have an initial meeting.
(1) We will need a community space that is large enough for this meeting.
(2) We will need a few resident speakers educated on the history of noise
pollution problems caused by MSP Airport. They should brief the audience on
what has occurred in the past.
(3) We will need a few resident speakers that briefly summarize what we have
learned about the recent noise pollution problem. (The airports response, what
our city council officials have discussed with the airports, the degree of
actions as citizens we have taken so far to complain about the problem.)
Any ideas? Any volunteers?
Thank you.
I just got a call from MPR News (Minneapolis Public Radio).
They are interested in our story.
They want to know what action -WE- are going to take next.
MPR wants me to keep them informed of our next steps.
We need some next steps.
I could really use some help from our pro-active neighborhood members to help
organize us. Any volunteers? Our voice and cause becomes magnified by having
media coverage. We need this.
I believe that all of us who are fed up with the airplane noise in our
neighborhoods need to gather together physically and have an initial meeting.
(1) We will need a community space that is large enough for this meeting.
(2) We will need a few resident speakers educated on the history of noise
pollution problems caused by MSP Airport. They should brief the audience on
what has occurred in the past.
(3) We will need a few resident speakers that briefly summarize what we have
learned about the recent noise pollution problem. (The airports response, what
our city council officials have discussed with the airports, the degree of
actions as citizens we have taken so far to complain about the problem.)
Any ideas? Any volunteers?
Thank you.
I just looked on google and found this
http://www.kaplankirsch.com/john_e_putnam.php
He represented the City of Minneapolis in litigation against the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport that resulted in a settlement that included noise
insulation
Kari
> From: <email obscured>
> Subject: Re: [Mpls-StanEric] Strib article about airport noise is in
> To: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org
> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:48:02 +1200
>
> There must be someone with more neighborhood historical knowledge than me
(I've only lived here for 2 years) who can help us figure out who handled the
litigation the first time around that won mitigation for most of the
surrounding areas. I am definitely willing to help, but I don't practice law in
this area so we need that resource or to find someone who has some knowledge of
litigating against MAC (I don't have a ton of spare time to quickly become an
expert on this). Even if we don't sue, we need to figure out what the options
are.
>
> We also need our elected officials to step up to the plate for us. There must
be some sort of compromise other than sending airplanes over a non-mitigated
area at the rate of 1 to 2 per minute for good chunks of the day.
> Lisa Schmid
> Standish-Ericsson, Minneapolis
> About Lisa Schmid: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/2dwHJWRULBf4ehKkphOmWa
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/46JdvcpnoPZWoXesyfPbp6
>
> Special Feedback - Are the new forum rules working for you?
> http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1299
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls-staneric
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net
http://www.kaplankirsch.com/john_e_putnam.php
He represented the City of Minneapolis in litigation against the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport that resulted in a settlement that included noise
insulation
Kari
> From: <email obscured>
> Subject: Re: [Mpls-StanEric] Strib article about airport noise is in
> To: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org
> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:48:02 +1200
>
> There must be someone with more neighborhood historical knowledge than me
(I've only lived here for 2 years) who can help us figure out who handled the
litigation the first time around that won mitigation for most of the
surrounding areas. I am definitely willing to help, but I don't practice law in
this area so we need that resource or to find someone who has some knowledge of
litigating against MAC (I don't have a ton of spare time to quickly become an
expert on this). Even if we don't sue, we need to figure out what the options
are.
>
> We also need our elected officials to step up to the plate for us. There must
be some sort of compromise other than sending airplanes over a non-mitigated
area at the rate of 1 to 2 per minute for good chunks of the day.
> Lisa Schmid
> Standish-Ericsson, Minneapolis
> About Lisa Schmid: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/2dwHJWRULBf4ehKkphOmWa
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/46JdvcpnoPZWoXesyfPbp6
>
> Special Feedback - Are the new forum rules working for you?
> http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1299
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: mpls-staneric@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls-staneric
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net
I learned that Mayor Ryback has been involved in the neighborhoods fight
against airplane noise since the beginning.
Mayor Ryback knows a lot about the issues.
The Mayor appoints the MAC chair.
Although it is premature - I will call the Mayors office and ask, "If our
neighborhoods can organize a meeting would he commit to showing up to speak and
offer advice?"
Personally, I am not interested in new windows, insulation, etc...or some
compromise.
I want to be able to open my windows or be outside in my yard and not hear and
see the planes.
against airplane noise since the beginning.
Mayor Ryback knows a lot about the issues.
The Mayor appoints the MAC chair.
Although it is premature - I will call the Mayors office and ask, "If our
neighborhoods can organize a meeting would he commit to showing up to speak and
offer advice?"
Personally, I am not interested in new windows, insulation, etc...or some
compromise.
I want to be able to open my windows or be outside in my yard and not hear and
see the planes.
