Hartsfield airspace plan may have repercussions across DeKalb, Gwinnett
Many Thanks to the Atlanta Journal Constitution for alerting our community to this dramatic change in flight patterns for Peachtree DeKalb Airport. Every resident should immediately contact the FAA and let them know we do not want this change of flight patterns to disrupt our daily lives. NUMBERS COUNT.
Here is the contact INFO:
Comments can be made via mail and online but must identify the proposal’s docket numbers, FAA Docket No. FAA–2011–1237 and Airspace Docket No. 08–AWA–5. Comments by mail should be sent to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–0001. Comments online must also include the docket numbers and may be submitted at www.regulations.gov. Comments will be accepted until April 3.
Hartsfield airspace plan may have repercussions across DeKalb, Gwinnett
By April Hunt
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Bonita Hoffmeister’s Doraville home is mere feet to the Gwinnett County line, far closer to Spaghetti Junction than to the nation’s busiest airport.
Yet a proposal to change the airspace around Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, 30 miles to the south, could increase noise and pollution in her Oakcliff neighborhood far more than any traffic on the tangle of roads nearby.
The Federal Aviation Administration proposal calls for allowing planes at the international airport to fly as low as 4,000 feet above the ground and extending the Class B space, which is handled by air traffic controllers.
As a result, jets flying into DeKalb-Peachtree Airport, the state’s second busiest airport, would need to be lower, longer over neighborhoods stretching from central DeKalb County and well into Gwinnett.
“They’re being been forced to fly in these narrow paths because the big jets are flying where they used to fly,” said Hoffmeister, an account manager whose home is routinely buzzed from the roar of planes. “It’s not their fault, but they are going to be all over us.”
Whether that scenario plays out is still officially up in the air, as the FAA gathers more public input on its proposal for how planes come in and out of Hartsfield.
Agency reports show the change is needed to handle crowded skies made more busy with the 2006 addition of a fifth runway at Hartsfield-Jackson.
FAA spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen said the agency cannot comment during the open public comment period but said in 2010 meetings that the change would make skies safer for all planes.
Officials at the DeKalb County airfield, though, have warned that change means many of their 400-plus daily flights will linger over neighborhoods as they come and go. They have urged residents to push back against what they say will be increased noise and pollution.
“I just think if my flights are lower longer, those flights are impacting more people, more citizens,” said Mike Van Wie, PDK’s airpport director. “If there is more noise and more pollution, we expect more complaints.”
People living near PDK have complained about those problems with the county-owned airport for 20 years. This time, residents and airport officials appear to be on the same side – as do many of the written comments already posted with the FAA.
None of the 13 comments posted online since the agency affirmed its proposal in February, many of them from self-identified Delta, military and recreational pilots, support the change. Similarly, only two of 150 who responded when the FAA unveiled its plan two years ago supported the change.
Mark Burns, a Locust Grove man wrote against the proposal in February and noted that he was on a committee that tried to get the FAA to change its plan in 2010.
Burns described the change as a convenience for the FAA but a burden on pilots like himself, who would need different equipment and also would have less time to deal with problems on take offs and landings.
“Overall this proposal decreases safety, increases equipment complexity and cost, and increases noise impact for all traffic not traveling to Hartsfield,” Burns wrote. “This design is flawed.”
The FAA is taking comments such as those until April 3. The agency will then review the comments and issue its final rule on the airspace.
Comments can be made via mail and online but must identify the proposal’s docket numbers, FAA Docket No. FAA–2011–1237 and Airspace Docket No. 08–AWA–5. Comments by mail should be sent to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–0001. Comments online must also include the docket numbers and may be submitted at www.regulations.gov. Comments will be accepted until April 3.