Ann Arbor City Council defeats airport expansion; local activists and Pittsfield leaders celebrate

Ann Arbor City Council voted 8-3 on Dec. 2 against two resolutions to accept Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) planning funds and to award a contract for preliminary design work on a proposed expansion of Ann Arbor Municipal Airport’s primary runway, community advocates and Pittsfield Township officials said.

The vote follows a 17-year campaign by the Committee for Preserving Community Quality (CPCQ) and a sustained partnership with Pittsfield Township opposing the runway extension. Andrew McGill, CPCQ co-lead and a Pittsfield Township resident, said the council’s decision was the group’s “perfect Christmas present.”

The council’s rejection halts the immediate use of MDOT grant money to begin planning work, though legal and administrative actions related to the project remain pending. McGill said CPCQ and Pittsfield have an active appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit challenging the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and MDOT approval of a finding of no significant environmental impact; a separate case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Why it matters: opponents argue the expansion would increase jets and larger aircraft over population centers, raise noise and public-health risks, and reduce nearby property values and tax revenues. They also say federal grant rules and prior agency procedures were not properly followed in approvals that allowed the project to advance.

McGill outlined six concerns he and allies have pressed for years: safety risks from lower, slower aircraft over neighborhoods; increased aircraft noise and its public-health effects; continued use of leaded aviation fuel by many small piston aircraft; potential property-value declines with associated lost tax revenue for local governments and schools; the project’s dependence on federal funds that limit a municipal airport’s ability to restrict aircraft types and hours; and possible impacts to local drinking-water wells at or near the airport. "Jet traffic will increase tenfold if the runway is expanded to about 3,650 operations a year," McGill said, citing figures used by opponents.

McGill also criticized what he described as inadequate outreach during earlier planning phases: he said neighbors first learned of the expansion plans after the Ann Arbor City Council had already voted to approve an airport layout plan in 2008, and he said the city never invited the opposing group to speak to the airport advisory committee. He said MDOT and other state-level aviation bodies met repeatedly with airport proponents but not with opponents.

On federal and legal issues, McGill told the forum that CPCQ’s appeal asks the D.C. Circuit to vacate the FAA and MDOT approvals for what opponents describe as violations of federal environmental law and the terms of Michigan’s block-grant relationship with the FAA. He warned that if the D.C. Circuit vacates the approvals, Ann Arbor could be required to repay federal planning funds and might need to perform an additional environmental review, after having spent “well over $1,000,000” on prior environmental assessments.

Commissioner Caroline Sanders, who represents District 4 (Pittsfield Township and part of Ypsilanti Township), said she and Pittsfield officials helped arrange tours and briefings for Ann Arbor council members — including visits to Willow Run Airport — that she credited with persuading some council members to vote against moving forward. Sanders described the vote as the result of a multiyear, multi-jurisdiction effort and said she hoped it will encourage more regional cooperation on transport and land-use issues.

Opponents highlighted several technical and health points discussed at length by McGill: that most Ann Arbor operations are training flights with older single-engine aircraft that still use leaded aviation gasoline exempted from the 1996 nationwide ban; that recent EPA actions identifying leaded aviation emissions as an endangerment increase health concerns for children; and that bringing jets to Ann Arbor could amplify concentrated lead and noise exposure because larger aircraft would fly lower and slower over populated areas if the runway were shifted west. McGill also cited a long-term study in Santa Clara County, Calif., showing higher blood-lead levels in children living close to an airport as a key piece of evidence opponents rely on.

What’s next: CPCQ and Pittsfield are planning a public event to mark the council vote and acknowledge long-term organizers; the celebration is scheduled for Feb. 4 at 5:30 p.m. at the Pittsfield Township administration building, Pittsfield staff member Ashley said. Legal appeals continue, and proponents could return to seek future approvals or planning funds depending on court outcomes and council decisions.

For now, opponents and township leaders called the council vote a major setback for the expansion and a demonstration that sustained local advocacy and intergovernmental outreach affected the outcome. "We don't oppose the Ann Arbor Airport at all. What we oppose is the expansion of the Ann Arbor Airport," McGill said.

Ending note: organizers said they will keep outreach to Ann Arbor residents and other regional officials ongoing and monitor court decisions that could affect whether planning work resumes.