Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Chamberlin Neighborhood Airport Planning Committee - 11/09/2015Chamberlin Neighborhood-Airport Planning Committee 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4131 www.sburl.com Monday, November 9, 2015 4:00 P.M. Chamberlin School Library, White Street, South Burlington AGENDA 1. Call to Order; Changes to the Agenda 5 min 2. Public Comment Period on Items NOT on the Agenda 5 min 3. Approve minutes from September 9, 2015 5 min 4. Presentation by and discussion with the Airport’s consultants on the new Noise Exposure Map, and additional studies to follow 45 min 5. Consider Committee work going forward 30 min 6. Other Business 5 min 7. Adjourn 5:45 P.M NOTE: A broader public presentation/discussion has been advertised by the Airport for 6:00 P.M. this same evening. CHAMBERLIN NEIGHBORHOOD – AIRPORT PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 9 SEPTEMBER 2015 1 The South Burlington Chamberlin Neighborhood Airport Committee held a meeting on Wednesday, 9 September, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Those Present: C. Sargent, Chair; P. Clemins, Vice Chair; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. Forde CCRPC, C. Baker, CCRPC; L. Krohn, CCRPC; L. Brakel, K. Schlenter, G. Severance, J Simson, W. Rooney, G. Maille, K. Robison, P. Nowak, L. LaRock, M. Companion, area residents. 1. Agenda Review: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public, not related to the Agenda: Two residents commented that since the houses have come down near the Airport, the runway noise has increased. This includes noise from the work being done on the tarmac which is amplified results noise when thein the parking garage and causes it to shakes. Ms. Nowak said this is a necessary and temporary situation and work should be completed by early fall. 3. Approve Minutes of 13 July 2015: Mr. Rooney moved to approve the Minutes of 13 July 2015 as written. Mr. Simson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Review Answers and Information that Arose from the Committee’s work session: Mr. Krohn provided a summary of answers to key questions that had been posed. a. How other areas handle similar airport challenges The two primary methods of dealing with noise in other similar airport/neighborhood circumstancesThe only two methods of deal with airport noise issues are the acquiring/removal of homes or the soundproofing of homes. There is no requirement that either of these things happens. There are some operational things that can happen, such as using tractors to back planes out instead of using airplane engines. A new noise contour map study is underway. If the 65 db line moves, the Airport will consider soundproofing of homes instead of buying them. b. Additional Landscaping/paths: This is possible, but may not be eligible for direct FAA funding. The Airport doesn’t intend to pursue this but will maintain the grassed areas (i.e., mowing). Mr. Conner noted that there may be additional ways to enhance landscaping, such as use of this land by the Airport to meet minimum landscaping requirements of any development on the Airport. 2 c. Public Use of Airport properties: The Airport won’t prohibit respectful use of those properties. d. Sale of Airport properties: The Airport could sell the land at fair market value. The money from the sale would go to the FAA which funded the purchase of the homes. They feel the cost would be prohibitive in the area’s market. The Airport does not intend to market the land at this time. Mr. Conner noted this is a very complex issue. Mr. Maille added that the state would also have to get involved as it also contributed to the land acquisition. Ms. Nowak noted the current litigation over the value of the land. It was noted that the Airport is willing to consider a “land-swap” with the city, which is allowed. e. Possible FAA funding for on-site noise mitigation: This is possible but the Airport has no plans to apply for this at this time; they have expressed interest in continuing operational improvements and relocation of the taxiway. 5. Consider possible scenarios for next community meeting Members reviewed and ranked ideas on traffic (rerouting, calming, analysis, etc.), bus shelter, placement of bus stops, signage, crosswalks, bike lanes, roundabout, re-aligning of streets, future use of acquired land, noise reduction strategies, uses for the school, street lighting, etc. and ranked these according to short/medium/long-range planning and cost potential. Ms. Sargent asked whether committee members could receive a copy of the completed chart. Mr. Krohn confirmed that yes, that would be provided. 6. Requests of Consultants for next meeting: Members felt they wanted one or two more meetings with the consultants before the public meeting. 7. Other Business There was no other business. By a motion made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.