Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 62


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 61
Case Studies in Airport/Stakeholder Communication 61 The public holds the airport operator responsible for aircraft noise, regardless of the source, but the local airport operator may have only limited ability to affect traffic density and aircraft location, which most impact noise patterns. Those who most benefit from the airport, the greater public, may not be part of negotiations on noise issues. "The one aspect of the structure that community members do understand and find frustrat- ing is their limited ability to have an impact on airport policy. Without regular input to the decision-making process, airport neighbors find that the only way to have a voice is by escalat- ing the dispute until it rises to the attention of the city, county, state or independent authority that governs the airport, the FAA, or elected representatives in Congress." (12, p. 7) Study Conclusions To enhance the airport's ability to more efficiently address development or environmental mit- igation efforts ". . . there is a need for both a greater commitment to genuine public participation (rather than just meeting the technical requirements of the funding grant) and a more refined use of the outreach tools available." (12, p. 12) An "airport-community relations committee should include all stakeholders such as regulatory agencies, local governments, regional publics and political representatives, some of whom do not currently participate in airport public participation efforts." (12, p. 12) The study recommends that standing committees on airport-community relations be estab- lished to build permanent relationships between the airport and its neighboring communities and aviation users. Further, permanent ongoing outreach should be punctuated by increased activity during a growth project or noise study effort. Relevant Findings The paper builds a convincing case, which is supported by the results of the surveys and inter- views conducted to develop information for this study that a culture exists among airports that resists meaningful public involvement. The paper provides insight into the reasons for the way airports deal with the community. Its survey, though approached in a different way than the sur- vey for this research, resulted in remarkably similar findings and insights. The finding that a good on-going relationship is beneficial when shorter term studies or conflicts arise is a powerful justification for improving relationships before a crisis occurs. Best Practices in the Transportation Industry: Transportation Research Board White Paper The non-aviation portion of the transportation industry has begun to understand the impor- tance of two-way communication in transportation planning. The "State of the Practice: White Paper on Public Involvement" (13), written by members of the TRB Committee on Public Involve- ment, says this about the state of practice in surface transportation: In the past decade, a radical transformation has occurred in the way transportation decisions are made. A new decision model has emerged and continues to be refined. The model assumes that public input into the assessment of transportation needs and solutions is a key factor in most transportation decision making. (13, p. 1) The need for public input into aviation studies and problem solving is also a key conclusion of this project team based on interviews and research for this Community Response to Airport Noise Study.