Swire & DDA Oppose FAA’s ‘One Engine Inoperative’ Policy

Swire Properties and the Downtown Development Authority were among those who recently submitted letters in opposition to the FAA’s proposed new ‘One Engine Inoperative’ policy.

If approved, the new policy could reduce building heights in downtown Miami by 50%, according to the DDA letter.

Canada’s WestJet Airlines sent a letter in favor of the new policy. Other airlines are said to be lobbying for the new rule, which could help save on fuel costs.

 

 

 

 

 

(image: visualhouse/swire)

33 Comments
most voted
newest oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Daniel
7 years ago

This is complete bs. Screw you FAA. Stop holding back the city of Miami’s downtown growth with taller buildings.

Peter
7 years ago

The airport has a much greater economic impact than extremely tall buildings.

Leon
7 years ago

This is BS, they dont use that much more fuel doing a semi-loop in the sky once they are already close to the city. Miami needs to tell them to suck it up.

gregory
7 years ago

The FAA is acting like their planes are flying at 1000 feet when they’re going over downtown.

Peter
7 years ago

This is in the event an aircraft loses one of two engines during takeoff.

Aldo
7 years ago

If we were wise we would be planning about moving the Airport and making it much more accessible like in London or Madrid. This kind of growth in Downtown and at MIA create these sort of conflicts.

Dan
7 years ago

Move the airport exactly where?

Relic
7 years ago

Lets face it… there is an eventual limit to height, but the city managers are oblivious to reality. They just keep approving permits on the loose and see if they stick. Flatiron is a blatant example of carelessness on a Brickell neighborhood that had already reached its density limit pertaining to such a large new project, at a height of 750 feet! 65 floors, with more than 550 apts in such a small lot. Makes absolutely no “urban” sense. It needs to go back to the drawing board.

gregory
7 years ago

What kind of kool aid are you drinking ? Brickell has not reached its density limit yet.

XVS
7 years ago

Actually it makes perfect “urban” sense. Urban implies high density, walkable envinronment. Maybe it makes no suburban sense, but it does make urban one.

Peter
7 years ago

Tall buildings close together does not equal a walkable environment. Look at pictures of the new CBD’s of China, Dubai, etc. Tall buildings surrounded by wide highways.

Washington, DC as well as many European cities are extremely dense and walkable yet lack 20+ floor buildings at every corner.

Mike
7 years ago

This isn’t DC or Europe, we need to go tall and Supertall bc we can not eat into the Everglades with anymore western development

XVS
7 years ago

Miami will never be an Italian village or a Swiss town. Think NYC, Singapore and Hong Kong. Those who don’t like it can always move couple miles inland and enjoy cheaper and more relaxed lifestyle there.

Juan Carlos Contreras
7 years ago

There are many ways to build an urban, high density neighborhood. You can go the route of New York, Hong Kong (and now Brickell), with tall, high-rises very close to each other. Another way is to build smaller, closer buildings like Madrid, Paris, or Rome. One is not better than the other.

Brickell has not reached its density limits, at all. There is plenty of vacant land in Brickell with much more potential for population growth.

marc
7 years ago

Something does need to be done about the transit infrastructure in that area though.

Laz
7 years ago

ive always fel MIA is in the wrong location, i know not much we can do now but….

Anonymous
7 years ago

MIA needs to reorient their runways so they don’t go over downtown, period. It would be much less costly then 1) moving MIA (not and option, especially after all of the renovations, metro rail link, and intermodal center) or 2) limiting the capacity of the urban core, which is the future of Miamis growth into a world class economic engine.

Francisco
7 years ago

Three things:
MIA directly and indirectly employs the most people in the county and it is a great economic engine than all those condos being built in downtown.
Building tall condos is great but when half of them are empty because they used to take money out of countries then it does not create the urban living we want.
Reorient runways? To where?

gregory
7 years ago

“Half of them are empty” Please actually walk around Brickell and stop making up stuff.

Francisco
7 years ago

What makes you think I don’t live in Brickell?

Anonymous
7 years ago

to address your comments:

1) Just because MIA is a great economic engine for the city (which nobody is disputing) doesn’t mean that the city should sacrifice itself and it’s development. World class cities are such because of the people and the city itself, not because of their airports.

2) Miami is limited in growth by a number of geographic factors (water to the east, everglades to the west, cities to the north and south). The urban core is where the density should occur, not sprawl out west. Also, your argument about the people buying these apartments being foreign and only here seasonally doesn’t make sense. What does it matter if a 20 story or 50 story tower is built. The footprint remains the same, the retail options at street level remains the same. The “urban living” is there for people who want to live here and enjoy it. The city spent a decade rewriting the code (Miami21) to spur growth in the urban core (and set the building heights), increase the walkability of the city and connect the different neighborhoods through smart growth. They are the experts on this, not the FAA.

3) http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2013/04/08/doh-shifting-mias-runways-5-degrees-will-solve-everything.php

Paul
7 years ago

AGREED

Francisco
7 years ago

Yes let’s listen to a column that says “Fun with Urban Planning.” One of the assets of MIA is that you can shoot parallel approaches. You move those runways and you limit that ability. Also MIA is 75% on a east flow so that configuration would just destroy the capacity at the airport. Runway 9/27 is the A380 runway if you move that runway the no more A380’s into Miami. I think the 1000ft cap we have right now is more than fine for Miami; I don’t think it should be lowered.

Anonymous
7 years ago

the airport runways can be redirected according to an article i saw a while back and it wouldn’t be by much. they can stay with in the foot print of the airport . the county would rather not do this that is why they have an agreement of 1000 feet limit which they are afraid that this rule from the faa if implemented could destroy. yes the airport is an economic engine but so are the property taxes that are collected from the buildings downtown and the jobs they also generate and thats the dilemma but there is a solution that can help both and that is to redirect the runways

Francisco
7 years ago

You cannot redirect the runways. It’s not as easy as painting three red lines on Microsoft Paint.

anonymous
7 years ago

The FAA needs to be reigned in when it comes to their ongoing efforts to restrict development.

And the DDA, Swire, Metro-Dade government and the city of Miami need to stop bowing to the
FAA. Look around the world and you will find plenty of examples of super-tall structures in downtown areas that are also within a few miles of major airports. Hong Kong comes to mind as but one example and in the US there is the painfully obvious situation in New York City, where two international airports are within seven miles of Manhattan’s skyscrapers and in opposite directions from the soaring skyline. LaGuardia airport is much closer to downtown Brooklyn which has a respectable and rapidly growing skyline. I haven’t heard anything about New York developers being constrained by the FAA.

The issue here comes down to insurance coverage. Theoretically, if the FAA does not approve a building’s height then insurers may not insure the structure. But in truth the insurance market is in the private sector and so insurers will know what is actually risky and what is not. They will not be swayed by the wholly artificially conceived one engine inoperative edict. When one thinks of it, if both engines are inoperative then perhaps the surface of the Earth presents an obstacle, so perhaps the FAA should get busy restricting that. Ten story buildings are completely out of the question because who knows(?), maybe a pilot will someday fall asleep while on final approach and jam the joystick downward, thus crashing into about the eighth floor! Miami, just get tough and stand up to the FAA, you will win in the end, that much is clear.

gregory
7 years ago

Also San Diego’s airport is the perfect example of planes coming in close to a downtown.

Anonymous
7 years ago

Yes, you are right. And until recently, San Diego was under a restrictive FAA building height cap. Then they “negotiated” with the federal agency and Presto(!), that cap was significantly lifted. Immediately afterwards, much taller buildings were constructed in downtown San Diego but the airport is still in the same place and busier than it has ever been.

The same thing also happened in Philadelphia, which until about 20 years ago had an artificially stunted skyline. Then they got tired of being bullied by the FAA and fought back in court, which resulted in the FAA backing down. Since then, a number of super-tall buildings have been added to the Philly skyline. The airport there is just five miles or so from the heart of the central business district on the banks of the Delaware river and the runway glide paths point more or less in the direction of downtown. Miami could cite any or all of these examples in their upcoming battles with the FAA.

It should be remembered that the FAA is a typical, bureaucratic federal agency and as such, will throw its weight around when it is allowed to do so. It seems obvious that Miami officials and developers have gone out of their way for years trying to cooperate with the FAA and in return, the agency is just pulling the noose tighter and tighter. Enough is enough, time to fight back in the name of fairness and economic necessities.

Laz
7 years ago

so lets say this is passed, why are they not concerned for the current occupants of the tall buildings already up since the 70’s? makes much more since to realign the runways

Gared
7 years ago

It seems to me that all of you guys being for, or against FAA restricting the height of the buildings in Downtown-Brickell area never looked at the map of Miami which includes the airport.If you did you would see which way the runways are aiming.The closest one on the north
side of the terminal aims directly in straight line at Venetian causeway and on the south side, the cross runway, is in straight line with Rickenbacker causeway.Now with a little bit of” good will”,there is more than enough space in this triangle that could be without any restrictions at all.Give it a look so you know this and know what you talking about.

Mike
7 years ago

FYI, M.I.A. distance from downtown Miami 7.9 miles

LaGaurdia distance from Manhattan 7.5 miles

Francisco
7 years ago

The runways at LGA do not face the Financial District or Midtown.

Dev1
7 years ago

This is all about money, airlines lobbying the FAA because they want to save fuel on take off.