The CHARGE.org - Coalition of Homeowner Alliances Requiring Government Equity

CHARGE is a grass roots organization established in December of 2003, three weeks after the opening of Bush Intercontinental Airport runway 26R/8L, the north most east/west runway. This after little to no notification of the effects of the runway on surrounding neighborhoods. The purpose of CHARGE is to counter the effects of the airport on surrounding neighborhoods on behalf of homeowners, businesses and governmental entities affected.
So what has CHARGE done?

CHARGE is affiliated with the West 45 Coalition and The Coalition Against Wayne Hooks Airport Expansion.

This is not the first time that Bush IAH has opened a runway which is directed at a neighborhood. About 1983 Bush IAH opened runway 27/9 which was in line with and 1.5 miles from a City of Humble neighborhood known as North Hollow. After a legal effort North Hollow and the City of Humble suffered a defeat from the much larger City of Houston and the Federal Air Administration (FAA).

Close-in affected neighborhoods


20 Mile Zone	7 Mile Zone

The next time that the surrounding neighborhoods were dealt a blow was in 2003 when 26R/8L was installed and opened. This runway was placed directed 1.5 miles from two 3 neighborhoods (Millcreek, Kenswick and Wood creek. It was also amazingly .75 miles due south of the Foxwood neighborhood.

At the same time as this north most east/west runway was opened, the Houston Airport System pulled all air freight facilities to Bush IAH increasing the operations and size of aircraft using Bush IAH accordingly. The Airport also removed approximately 1 mile of forest on the north end. Forests provide an incredible amount of sound buffer and it is now gone.

Apparently Bush IAH intends to do it again, with the blessing of FAA. FAA is the larger part of the problem. Within 5 years Bush IAH has in progress two more east/west runways, one of which will displace two neighborhoods and a large Church and be directed at and within 1.5 miles of the neighborhood of Timberwood (also in Humble).

The Problems Caused by the Airport and its expansion.

Noise
is the most apparent problem. With neighborhoods within 1.5 miles of the ends of the new runway coupled with a descent rate of 300 feet per mile, the arriving air traffic is less than 500 feet above these neighborhoods. The decibel level ranges from 40 dbls at normal times to upwards of 80 to 120 dbls during an arrival according to the 2006 airport noise study. One would think that a decibel is a decibel but like many things they can be manipulated. FAA uses a weighted average taken over a year to determine whether it affects the homes beneath the flight path. Additionally FAA also uses 65 dbls as a base to gauge their remediation efforts. EPA says that 55 dbls should be the base rate.

The Decibel - Decibel Calculations - Click to learn more about Decibel Calculations.

These over flights occur approximately 1 time per minute during “pushes” (busy traffic times of the day). Homeowners report walls rattling, conversations and TV listening not possible during arrivals. And yet the noise study says these people are not affected. It doesn’t take much to imagine what these folks are going thru.

To their credit Bush IAH has established a Runway Management Plan (part 1 & part 2) (RMP) which prioritizes the runway use with 26R/8L as the last use runway in the priority. The RMP also closes 26R/8L from 10PM to 6AM. Unfortunately the RMP is a voluntary program by the airport and has many exceptions. To date the airport has declined to place the RMP into a formal and obligatory Noise Abatement Program (NAP) or Noise Compatibility Plan (NCP) which would make it mandatory. Issues specific to Bush IAH.

Noise is known as nuisance.

Air pollution

Although no pollution studies have been done around Bush IAH, or for the most part anywhere in the country, it is widely known that jet fuel produces numerous exhaust gases (including PCBs) which are harmful to humans and animals. With the concentrated arrival patterns exposure is almost assured.

Within a month of the opening of 26R/8L, the homeowners in the flight path on both ends experienced an average loss of 11% of value due to reduction by the Harris County Appraisal District. Recovery has not occurred, 2007 values again experienced a loss with the writers value loosing $5000 per each $90,000 of value.

This is known legally as a “taking”.

Not completely known, as it is a future occurrence, is the effect that the airport and its expansion will have on the larger surrounding area. A look at existing airports and the effects on surrounding areas indicates that areas surrounding airports evolve into primarily commercial and industrial areas with a propensity for lower income residential and multifamily. In the Houston area, this prediction has come true around Hobby airport on the south side of the City. This can be controlled somewhat by developmental control known as Land Use Management - Tiering. None exists for the Houston Airport System.

Potential for Catastrophic Disaster

It is readily apparent that the number of aircraft flying over the very close neighborhoods tests the law of averages. While hopeful that no such occurrence will happen but we are fearful that one may. Several close calls have occurred.

Loss of Use of Property

Due to the excessive noise airport neighbors loose use of their property inside and outside. Enjoyment of outside activities are curtailed but inside the noise factor rattles walls, make TV and music listening difficult and conversation suffers.

Within one month of the opening of 26R/8L, the Harris County Tax Appraisers had lowered the value of homes in the flight path by an average of 11%.

So one asks how can this happen?

At first airport neighbors focused all their ire at the airport and the planes but they are a smaller part of the problem. FAA and its rules for locating and expanding airports is the primary problem. Although their mission statement says otherwise, the actions prove that they are completely on the side of airports and commercial airlines. Recently it appears that their primary focus of air safety is being ignored. The news if filled with violations by the airlines and the FAA inspectors.

In fact, CHARGE’s interaction with FAA has shown them to be a bigger and more immovable bureaucracy than it IRS. This writer would not have thought that possible. Where CHARGE has been able to get federal legislators involved with the FAA issue, FAA has even ignored the legislators. It appears that the only thing that FAA responds to is for Congress to withhold FAA funding.

So what about the legislators?

It would seem that they would be responsive to their constituency. The fact is that most of them are more concerned with the re-election dollars to take a stand. When one does take a stand, it is impossible to get a group consensus together so that something can actually happen. CHARGE has learned that there was a Caucus of ‘airport legislators’ in the U.S. House in 2001. Most now are no longer holding office and due to lack of leadership, the Caucus is mostly dysfunctional. In fact today that could be said of most of Congress. FAA takes advantage of this.

Helpfulness Ratings of Elected Officials

So why hasn’t this airport expansion issue been resolved?

The problem exists all over the country at medium to large airports. The reason varies, at the City of Houston owned Bush IAH it is because the affect airport neighbors are not in the City of Houston thusly no representation. In other places where the affected areas are in the city, action has been taken and is relatively affected but these situations are far from the majority.

Current Airports with NAPs 10.20

Forward movement on the Bush IAH issue could have been made if the neighbors of the airport would get involved, write their elected officials regularly, call the airport with noise complaints etc. Solutions are possible. Instead there seems to be a core group who is involved, and a much larger group that falls into one of the following groups; wants a quick fix, doesn’t have time, sticks their head in the sand or thinks it doesn’t (or won’t) affect them. How to file a noise complaint with Bush IAH.

How far away from Bush IAH is affected by airport operations and by further expansion of the airport?

Bush affects people as far away as 20 miles from the airport due to the way planes are routed in and out of the Bush IAH airspace. The airspace configuration is twenty years old or more, when air traffic was much less concentrated. Since that time two more runways have been added with two more slated within five years.

The older airspace configuration is in desperate need of reconfiguration. This is not opinion but comes from pilots using Bush and from air traffic controllers with whom CHARGE has spoken. Even the local FAA management seems to indicate this but they will or cannot say it. Remember the bureaucracy FAA. To ask the Ft Worth regional FAA, all is well here in Houston. But the cause of the delay in reconfiguration has been traced to Memphis Center (FAA) who doesn’t want to do anything although a committee has been studying the reconfiguration for about 5 years. Everyone knows what needs to be done but the bureaucracy is immovable.

IAH FLIGHT PATH CROSS SECTION FOR THE NEW RUNWAY

Take an aircraft on approach to Bush IAH. The aircraft is put on the flight path at 2000 feet until it intersects the glide path. The glide path is the downhill run to the runway from the flight path. Aircraft are, by regulation, allowed to descend at 300 feet per mile. So the intersection begins at about 7 miles from the airport.

So everyone within the 7 mile radius is under a severe nuisance since the airport has pointed runways at those neighborhoods.

And everyone outside the 7 mile radius is under the gun because the flight path is so low. This flight path can extend out 30 miles when the airport is under a ‘push’. A push is a busy operations period. This low flight path is not necessary since the inception of Continuous Descent Approach (CDA). This is an approach system that starts from cruising altitudes and places the plane on the glide path from those altitudes. People outside the 7 mile radius would immediately be unaffected.

Issues exclusive to Bush IAH which makes it difficult for CHARGE to make progress:

Bush IAH is part of the City of Houston and sits on the top of the City. This makes the affected people mostly in the county with no elected officials to go to for help.
Remediation (buy-outs, sound proofing) has occurred but curiously has only occurred within the City of Houston limits.
Bush IAH has prevailing south winds. 3 of the 5 existing runways (including the newest 26R/8) are east/west runways. Since the next two runways are also planned as east/west runways it is our contention that airport planning has been defective and part of the problem. It is certainly not pilot friendly as anything over a 10 knot crosswind makes landing hazardous. In fact days have occurred to shut several runways down canceling arrivals and departure due to crosswinds
During a 2006 meeting with Houston Airport System Administrator Rick Vacar, CHARGE got agreement to work with Bush IAH to establish a written NAP but despite several meetings and proposals, none has been established to date.
Bush IAH centralized cargo for all 3 airports to IAH which instantly increased operations and over flights of larger aircraft.
Flight paths, on arrival, are set at 2000 feet. Depending on the traffic, this 2000 foot flight path can extend out from the airport 15 to 20 miles. Needless to say, all homeowner under this path are needlessly affected by the air traffic. The simple solution is to institute Continuous Descent Approach (CDA).

Simply put, this system descends the aircraft continuously from cruising altitudes such that the homeowners beyond a 7 mile radius would experience air traffic at altitudes higher than 2000 feet. Remember that 2000 feet is only the sum of 7 football fields.
When the newest runway was installed, all freight carriers were moved to Bush IAH which instantly increased the air traffic for the affected area around the airport.
The Houston Airport System has, as its announced goal, to become the larger freight operation in the country.
When the newest and north most runway was installed, over a mile of forestation was removed. Since forests are known sound absorbers, this immediately opened the surrounding areas to more noise.
IAH plans to continue the east/west construction with the two new proposed runways scheduled to be on line by 2011.

Houston Airport Master Plan

FAA is a larger part of the problem. Facts:

FAA funds all commercial Fairport expansion – the taxpayer pays for the planes flying over his head with absolutely no control or say
FAA controls all commercial airport expansion
But the largest joke in the airport expansion process is the Environmental Impact Study

Expansion requires Environmental Impact Study (EIS) which is a three volume stack of papers with little conclusion except the one desired prior to the EIS

i. Notification of surrounding areas can and is made in newspapers up to 50 miles away

ii. In the case of Bush, a flyer was mailed out two weeks prior to the runway opening saying that if one is not affected by airport noise now, nothing will change

The EIS requires a Noise Study which is based primarily on algorithms consisting of noise data on individual aircraft from their manufacturer and estimate operations data from the expanding airport – both are variables
1. FAA’s mission statement says:
2. FAA is failing in is primary mission of safety
3. FAA is in bed with the airports and airlines
4. FAA no longer controllable, its head is a political appointment not requiring any background, its beau racy is not accountable to the taxpayer or Congress
5. FAA thru taxpayer’s dollars are paying for all expansion and upgrading of the airports, congratulations YOU are paying for the headaches you are experiencing.
6. Under the FAA noise calculations, a home can be overflighted once per year low enough to lift shingles and that would be OK because the calculations average the over flights over a year which dilutes the noise factor well below the FAA standard of 65 dbls.
7. Flight controllers say that the current Bush IAH air configuration is not good and needs change.

West flow

East flow

So what is the solution?

There are five areas where the system can be righted:

Bush IAH needs to establish a Noise Abatement Program (CHARGE’s proposed NAP) and (Poe higher altitudes)
Bush IAH needs to establish a Land Use Management Program to control new development in the existing and future flight paths – the problem has been that Bush IAH’s airport planning is faulty and not followed. (Put picture Texas HB 2270 Land Use Management)
FAA needs to reconfigure the Bush IAH airspace – it is antiquated and even the controllers indicate that it is needed. It was established when Bush IAH was Jetero Airport and only had two runways.
FAA controls all airport expansion thru the Environmental Impact Study (including the noise study) – sounds good on the surface but when researched it is just a three volume set of books to satisfy the requirement. Citizen complaints are ignored, notification is ignored, the criteria used to determine noise are variables and subject to manipulation by the airport operator/owner.
The neighbors of the airport need to voice their discontent with what the Houston Airport System is doing without their representation and to their properties. People surrounding Bush IAH, from Lake Houston to Rosehill ignore the problem, bury their heads in the sand, don’t understand that time makes it worse and depend on others to do it – there is power in numbers but without numbers the residents will be run down by the airport expansion.

Alternative Solutions that the FAA and the Airport are not willing or able to take.

The solutions...The cure

Noise Abatement Program established by Bush Intercontinental Airport
Land Use Management around the airport
Reconfiguration of the use of the airspace around the airport
More FAA restrictions on how the surround area is treated in an airport expansion

Noise Abatement Program as proposed by CHARGE to the Houston Airport System

Most middle to large airports, in this country, have NAPs
The NAP encourages noise abatement during the planning stages of airport expansion – the following is the plan CHARGE proposed to the Houston Airport System.

Need to respond as a responsible neighbor to citizen concerns
Implement Passur monitoring system with public access
Work with local governments to establish a land use commission as allowed by state law (Chapter 141 & 142 of the Local Government Code).

Establish commission comprised of HAS/FAA/citizens/municipalities/county
Establish non compatible residential zones around airport which are and are not compatible with airport noise
Purchase reserves at the ends of runways and planned runways for noise compatibility
Insure complete disclosure of expansion plans with REAL resident input
Determine expansion of residential development in present or future flight paths
PFC – pass facility charge – charge passenger service fee to compensate the residences that are adversely affected
Implement permanent noise monitoring in neighborhoods
Establish avigation easements
Implement permanent pollution monitoring

Establish a Noise Compliance Program, become a good and responsible neighbor, plan for encroachment on neighbors rather than just installing runways where is there land to put one.

General
i. Discontinue encroaching on surrounding neighborhoods
ii. Must have active and growing Noise Compliance Program
iii. Use 15’2 as designed…for departures
iv. Emulate fly quiet programs (Chicago)
v. hange use of airspace to fly around non-compatible areas
vi. Participate in AIP 150 funding
     1. Seek funding for NCP
          vii. Mitigation for affected homeowners
          viii. Establish noise abatement procedures on 10-4 page in Jeppesen manual
          ix. Continuous noise monitoring and contour map updates
          x. Use other airports as examples of cures
          xi. Establish sound barriers to take place of removed forestation
               1. Burms as sound barriers
               2. Noise barriers
b. Arrivals and departures
     i. Preferential runway use
     ii. Make turns on headings around residential areas
     iii. RNAV – area navigation
     iv. Establish no-fly times for certain runways
     v. Est. priority use for runways and assure FAA compliance
     vi. Est. primary departure runways
     vii. Establish minimum altitude over residential
     viii. Direct older hushkittted to runways with the least residential impact
     ix. Start speaking in terms of “Noise Sensitive Areas” -
          1. Establish NSA’s and publish to pilot’s manuals and produce brochure
          2. All East-West runways negates the airport’s North-South departure flow and ignores the prevailing wind direction
c. Departures
     i. Noise abatement signs on runways
     ii. ICAO A departure procedures (close in noise abatement departure)
d. Arrivals
     i. Raise flight path intercepting altitudes (turn on altitudes)
     ii. Set minimum altitudes prior to turning
     iii. Arrivals
          1. Close in NAP – ICAO profiles – all 121 air carriers have these already established
          2. CDA – continuous descent approach – (less power, less noise)
e. Ground operations
     i. Establish and invoke fines for run-up violations
     ii. Create run-up enclosures
     iii. Designate run-up hours

ALL OF THE ABOVE WERE FOUND, ALREADY IN PLACE AT OTHER AIRPORTS – NONE OF THIS IS NEW OR GROUND BREAKING – EXAMPLES CAN BE FOUND AROUND THE COUNTRY AT MAJOR AIRPORTS WHERE CITIZENS PARTICIPATE AND REVIEW NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAMS!

NAP uses FAA technology called RNAV which is in testing in Atlanta and Las Vegas airports – specifically Continuous Decent Approach

Prof. John-Paul Clarke, PhD Aeronautical Engineering MIT, Director of the
Aeronautical Engineering Laboratory at Georgia Institute of Tech, Advisor to Boeing

Planes should fly high over residential areas and begin their descent on the glide slope at the last possible moment.
Higher planes mean less noise
Currently planes fly at 2000 feet from the newest runway

Land Use Management

Is it zoning…No
The NAP establishes flight corroders… the Land Use Management prevents noise sensitive development in these corroders
Who is in control – this is a commission comprised of Houston, Humble, Harris county, FAA and citizen neighbors of the airport
Land use management recommended by Environmental Impact Study of 2000
Land use is allowed by State Law
It is exclusively for the airport “affected areas” and future expansion
It prevents this problem with future expansion

Land Use Management is a way of limiting the land use around the airport operations area such that noise sensitive development is not placed in the operational area.

This is useful in countering present problems but even more useful for future expansion. Land Use Management is recommended by the FAA and is allowed by State Law.

The surrounding area comes under the authority of a Land Use Management Commission to that proper land use can be enforced and noise sensitive development is disallowed.
Noise sensitive development is classed as residential, Churches, hospitals and schools.

The Commission should have representation from City of Houston, City of Humble, Harris County and citizens groups and individuals.

This Commission should take over the responsibilities for the Noise Abatement Program which is not stagnant and must be revisited periodically as should the Land Use Management area.

Reconfiguration of the Bush Intercontinental Airport Airspace

NAP establishes air corroders, FAA adjusts use of the airspace
Present configuration is not efficient according to controllers, nor is it noise sensitive
A commission is established to reconfigure

The current configuration (the way FAA uses the airspace) was tripled in 2003 at the same time as the opening of 26R/8L.

The Houston Airport System has called for this as has the Air Controllers union. The commission currently setup to handle this is stagnant due to FAA’s Memphis center who doesn’t want to change anything.

The current Houston airspace has been in existence since the airport was first built and has been added onto each time a new runway has been added.

FAA’s attitude on airport expansion

FAA is a bureaucracy much like the IRS
It does not report to the citizens of this country
It’s basic premise is to enhance air travel and promote safety
It will require the efforts of our elected officials

The following is from the FAA’s website:

Our Mission
Our mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.

Our Vision
Our vision is to improve the safety and efficiency of aviation, while being responsive to our customers and accountable to the public.

Our Values

Safety is our passion. We're world leaders in aerospace safety. Quality is our trademark. We serve our country, our customers, and each other. Integrity is our character. We do the right thing, even if no one is looking. People are our strength. We treat each other as we want to be treated.

After experiencing the most recent expansion here in Houston, CHARGE believes that FAA needs to re-read their agency beliefs.

FAA allows what has happened here.
     The Houston Airport System took full advantage.
          The neighbors of the airport are the ones that are paying the price.

FAA’s stance on airport expansion is NOT concerned with
neighboring communities – it is safety and
promotion of air carriers and airports

So what can you do?

Your Part

Richard Vacar, Director, Houston Airport System said, “IAH receives approximately 1,000
noise complaints a month and 80 to 90 percent of those are made by the same six people.”
(Spring Online Observer, 8/1/2005 Edition)

You are the most important part of the solution
Complain to the airport when you have problems…Every time you have a problem…the airport noise compliance office can have a greater impact on the problem if you can provide details, time, date, type of plane, altitude, what occurred
How to complain handouts…on the tables outside
Lodge a complaint with FAA when you see unsafe flight operations
File a complaint with your elected officials…put them on notice of the problems
Notify them repeatedly…once is not enough for them to think there is a problem
Talk to neighbors & friends about doing the same…repeatedly
Join the CHARGE

A Note on Our Elected Officials

They work on many different issues
They sometimes get separated from the issues of their constituents
They need to be reminded of our problems - Regularly
They do not know what problems we have if we do not tell them

The elected official’s part

What Can the Elected Officials Do?

State Elected Officials

Help establish Land Use Commission for Bush Intercontinental Airport region
Encourage the Houston Airport System to play their role in curing the expansion problem both now and for future expansion
Encourage Commissioner Eversole to begin promised pollution monitoring as is done at the ship channel
City/County officials are included in this category

Federal Elected Officials

Federal Officials can have the greatest impact on FAA - FAA needs to change the decibel level to 55, from 65, just as the EPA recommends
Federal Officials can have the greatest impact on the Houston Airport System – getting them to listen and act!

How to find your elected officials…
(and send them emails or letters)

The airport’s part

The Houston Airport System has a part to place in the Cure

Adopt an Noise Abatement Program (NAP)
Discussed under the Cure section

Begin the establishment of a Land Use Management Commission
HAS Administrator Vacar has indicated that the Mayor and he has discussed this and approve
Kent McClemore (HAS Planning Director) admitted that he was glad CHARGE was promoting this at SuperNeighborhood #42 meeting on October 24^th 2006 (In 2008 he was replaced by Eric Potts.)
The Commission should be comprised of Houston, Humble, Harris officials and citizens of the surrounding neighborhoods

Both items were discussed as needed in a meeting between CHARGE and Rick Vacar on April 11th 2006
This entity
takes over responsibility for periodic updates to the NAP
prevents noise sensitive development to take place in present and future flight paths
noise sensitive development is residential, churches, hospitals, schools etc
The area controlled is the air affected or to be affected by Bush Intercontinental air operations

The FAA’s part

FAA, as stated, is probably a worse beau racy than the IRS if you can believe it. FAA problems are outlined above and their solutions are to become responsible to the tax payers that support them. The whole process of airport expansion should be revamped with citizens involved in the process to make sure that the public is protected. The pressure that you put on your elected officials is key here. FAA may be unmovable by your officials do respond to communication from you, especially a lot of you.

What CHARGE has done:

Proposed Noise Abatement Program – this involves everything from arrival/departure procedures and reconfiguration of the airspace to land use management so incompatible development does not occur. (program doc)
Define incompatible development – this consists of neighborhoods, churches, schools and hospitals primarily.
Encouraged and received a new noise study in 2005(review study – Wylie Executive Summary) – the study was so flawed that some of the public members (which included CHARGE) left the study and CHARGE refused to accept the findings of the study.
Received the Runway Management Plan in 2004 (see plan - part 1 & part 2)
CHARGE requests help from the Texas Attorney General (see request response)
2007 Legislature produces Land Use Management bill. (See bill)
CHARGE recommends homeowners send demand letters prior to the statute of limitations expires (see letter)
CHARGE has made numerous requests of the elected officials by way of meetings and correspondence. (lists of meetings, ratings of helpfulness of elected officials)
In 2006 CHARGE was invited to speak to the US House Subcommittee on Aviation – a letter was sent but the Subcommittee selected all bureaucrats to speak to them. We wondered why but have our suspicions. (see letter)
CHARGE has encouraged the US House regrouping of an Airport Caucus which has lain dormant since 2001. (See 2001 House members)
CHARGE has been able to get media exposure but it is difficult since this is a “NON FLASHIE” issue that the media seems to like.

Litigation in Houston

Simmons – an elder couple had just purchased a new retirement home about 3 miles west of the new runway 26R/8L in 2003 – in November of 2003 IAH started using the new runway and the noise began – the Simmons decided this was a nuisance and took the City of Houston to court in an Humble small claims court and won! All they were looking for was $5,000.00 to sound proof their windows and live the rest of their retirement peacefully – unbelievably the City appealed to District court and got a new trial – in March of 2008, the City settled with the Simmons for an undisclosed amount as the City saw that they were going to loose and didn’t want a precedent set in court.
Some homeowners of Woodcreek subdivision filed suit on the City of Houston in 2006 for nuisance, taking and damages – not all the homeowners were financially able to be part of this effort – the case is set for trial in the summer of 2008 and is pending.

The Future of Bush IAH

The 2025 plan indicates that the terminal system, as we know, will be completely rebuilt similar to Atlanta’s airport (go to master plan)
Two new runways are in planning and HAS indicates that they wish them on-line by 2011. They are both east/west runways and both serve to intensify the operations.

In 2007 the Texas legislature granted the City of Houston the power to establish a zone of control around its airports, it controls all development. CHARGE lobbied for citizen representation but the legislature did not listen. Representative Riddle’s office disregarded the request. The City of Houston now has developmental control around Bush IAH including most of the City of Humble and much of County Precinct 4. It is doubtful that land owners will be compensated for this condemnation type treatment. The control has been dubbed Tiering.

Land Use Management

NEW NEWS 4-30-08

Dateline: April 30^th 2008

The Houston Chronicle reports that the City of Houston is tiering the area around Bush Intercontinental Airport.

Houston Chronicle April 30 Tiering Article

This issue started several years earlier. The following is the time line to update you:

2000 - Environmental Impact Study (EIS) allowing Bush IAH to expand was approved with a caveat that Houston Airport System (HAS) develop and implement land use management around the airport to control the development of property with noise sensitive structures for use as schools, hospitals, residential, child care and such. These would pertain to areas which are under the main flight path of both ends of all runways.

2003 - Runway 26L/8R opens in October as a result of the EIS.

2006 - After conducting stakeholder and public meetings HAS received from FAA and letter indicating that they had not developed land use management policies and further funding of expansion would not be possible.

FAA letter to HAS regarding land use management.

(URL for Airport announces Land Use Management - G:\New Airport Website Stuff\Sent to Al\Land Use Mgt\HoustonAirportSystem-ProposedAreaLandUseRegulaltions.mht)

CHARGE speaks to the City of Humble City Counsel notifying them of the upcoming Land Use Management which will likely take developmental control away from the City and citizens of Humble.

CHARGE notifies and requests HAS that Land Use Management be established so that further development in the present and future flight paths be controlled. CHARGE requested that all parties involved be on the Commission including Humble, citizens groups such as CHARGE and neighborhood homeowner associations.

2007 - The City of Houston petitioned the State legislature to permit developmental control around airports. This because the Houston area does not have zoning. This was made law in HBO 2349I and SBO 1360I.

The Law allows HAS to take developmental control for 1.5 miles on either side of the runways and 5 miles off the ends of the runways.

2008 - City of Houston develops a Tiering plan to satisfy the FAA requirements. They will have a land commission which controls development and rules for developing.

The make up of the City of Houston Land Commission is by Houston designated persons + 1 from Humble + 2 from Harris County Pct 4.

Find where your home or property is situated

Land Commission’s control:

The City of Houston has now extended its control of develop beyond its City Limits and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.
This control extends over a majority of the City of Humble.
The control extends over a large part of HC Pct 4.

Negatives of the Tiering

The majority of the City of Humble, developmental control does not rest with the City of Humble.
No citizens group has been asked to have a representative, including CHARGE.
A homeowner in Tier 1 may find himself in three dilemmas
a. His property is now tagged as being in Tier 1 which lowers his value – this can affect the mortgagor and his ability to sell.
b. If there are undeveloped lots in his neighborhood, sound proofing (additional costs) are required.
c. The MUD districts in #5 neighborhoods will find that their projected growth will be stymied because of the lower values and increased construction costs – district debt repayment might be threatened.
d. Depending on cost, renovations to his home may also require the soundproofing to also be involved.
e. Essentially the undeveloped lots have been condemned but already built lots get no help and have been equally condemned.
Tier 2 residents and undeveloped land owners have similar restrictions.
It doesn’t provide any relief to the undeveloped property owner whose buyer market has now shrunk due to development restrictions.
The City of Houston is not required to return anything for the developmental control they have taken.
This Tiering plan does not protect against future development of Bush IAH.
The Tiering plan does nothing to relieve the existing noise sensitive developments such as housing; EXCEPT it does burden these already existing developments with soundproofing requirements when renovating.

CHARGE’s views on the Land Commission

It allows for political abuses such as the already approved variance for the NE Medical Centers expansion. This hospital already stands directly off the east end of runway 26L/8R. This is also the primary arrival runway.
CHARGE believes the hospital or the City should be more responsible than to allow this for a structure that houses sick people. It would appear that politics wins over the general welfare….again!
The dilemma of the Tier 1 homeowner is property owner abuse (see above).
CHARGE promoted the Land Use Management under the premises of:
a. Relief for those already under the Tiers, remember they already have been for years.
b. Protection for future development in the way of future runways, here we are speaking of beyond 10 years.
c. Representation of persons affected such as neighborhood associations and citizens groups.
d. NONE IF THESE ARE INCLUDED.
The City of Humble is underrepresented.
Harris County is underrepresented.
So far Pct.4 has not determined to send representatives, CHARGE is concerned about county citizen representation.
The affected citizens are NOT represented because 95% are outside of the City of Houston and have no representation.
This plan is already 15 years late.
This appears that the City of Houston has won again and now has full control of continually expanding areas at all three of its airports. This without any control by the affected citizens in these areas.

You might be interested in an FAA response to a Tier 1 homeowners request for relief.

Guttery Letter

The writer seems to indicate that the homeowner should move. The irony is that the homeowner was there before the runway that has now engulfed him.