09-10-1997 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSIOIV
AGENDA
September 10, 1997 - 7 p.m. - Large Conference Room
1. Call to Orde� - 7 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of August 13, 1997 Meeting Minutes.
4. Unfinished and New Business:
a. Discuss Airport Issues with IVleg McMonigal, Planner for
Comprehensive Plan - Issues Identification
b. Report on City Council Action - 1997/1998 Airport Action Plan
c. Review Proposed Exhibits for 3rd Parallel Runway Contract
d. Appoint Member to Subcommittee to Review MAC and MASAC
Representation and Met Council Noise Zone Policy Areas
e. Review Met Council Noise Zone Policy Areas
5. Updates
a. Discuss Future Speakers
b. MASAC Executive Committee - Issue of Representation
c. Community Stabilization Working Group
d. Joint Workshop - Northern Dakota County Airport Relations
Commissioners
6. Acknowledge Recei�t of Various Reaorts/Correspondence�
a. MASAC Agenda for August 26, 1997 and July 22, 1997 Minutes
b. MASAC's Abbreviated Technical Advisor's Report for July 1997
c. Airport Noise Report for August 18, 1997
d. SMAAC Newsletter
e. Eagan ARC Agenda for September 4, 1997
7. Other Comments or Concerns.
8. Adjourn.
Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a
notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to
provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please contact City
Administration at 452-1850 with requests
__ _ . _
,,
.l
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIOIVS COMMISSION
AUGUST 13, 1997 - MINUTES
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held
on Wednesday, August 13, 1997 in the City Hall Large Conference Room, 1 101
Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The following
members were present: Beaty, Leuman, May, Des Roches and Gross.
Commissione�s Fitzer and Stein were excused. Also present were City
Administrator Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser.
� •' • � •
�
Commissioner May moved approval of the July 9, 1997 Minutes.
Commissioner Des Roches seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
MISCELLANEOUS
Chair Beaty stated that he had attended the NOISE conference and felt that
the conference had provided excellent information. He noted that he is
interested in inviting Mr. Ahuja, of the Georgia Tech Research Institute, to
speak at an upcoming Commission rrieeting. He stated that Mr. Ahuja
indicated that the City should be able to conduct its own tests and get an
accurate depiction of sound and develop air noise contours based on these
tests. Beaty stated that by the City conducting its own testing, may help
provide some "teeth" in negotiating/discussing changes with the MAC.
Beaty indicated that Mayor Mertensotto is also interested in hearing this
individual speak. He also suggested that Mr. Ahuja attend an upcoming
NDCARC meeting. Commissioner Gross suggested that the City request a
resume from Mr. Ahuja. Beaty suggested that staff provide the Mayor with a
copy of the Whiley Research analysis.
.�. . -•�- . � � •
Administrator Batchelder stated that the Commission had discussed
updating the Action Plan at their July meeting. He noted that the
� � AUGUST 13, 1997 AIRPORT RELATIONS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES
Commission had made several changes to the plan and that they have been
added to the Action Plan for their final review tonight.
�
Administrator Batchelder noted that the Commission has added a new goal
to the plan, Revisiting Fanning Options off of 11 L. Batchelder stated that
fanning of aircraft already occu�s to the north and inquired if the Commission
intends for their goal to fan aircraft further south. He reminded the
Commission that no headings are issued south of the 29 localizer.
Chair Beaty referred to the Braslau report where Mr. Braslau suggested air
noise relief by fanning aircraft in all directions from MSP. He stated that Mr.
Braslau felt that by spreading aircraft noise, there will be much less noise in
one specific area. Commissioner �euman stated that aircraft cannot be
fanned much farther north because of the St. Paul Airport airspace. Chair
Beaty stated that the control tower currently fans the aircraft.
Batchelder stated that this issue is in conflict with other goals the
Commission has established such as narrowing the air noise corridor.
Commissioner Des Roches stated that she is concerned that this "goal" will
distract other issues the Commission is currently working on within the
Action Plan.
Chair Beaty stated that the City Council is looking for equity of air noise. He
stated that the Council should consider reviewing this issue as it is tough to ��
not include the northern area of Mendota Heights if the City's intent is to
equitably distribute air noise. Commissioner Gross stated that the reality is
that the airport and city are here to stay and that the City should continue to
focus on narrowing the corridor. Beaty stated that he agrees. Gross noted
that he is concerned that the community may interpret this new "goal" as
the Commission unsure of what it wants to accomplish. He stated that this
new goal is contrary to what the Commission has been working on over the
past few years. Chair Beaty stated that this goal fits into the equity issue of
the Action Plan.
Commissioner May stated that he believes that the concept of fanning fits
within the Action Plan and that it should be considered as a part of noise
abatement procedures.
Administrator Batchelder explained that the City had reviewed this concept in
the past and that the study is available to the Commission. He stated that as
a result of this study and the City's persistence in equitable air noise
distribution, the MAC developed the now implemented crossing pattern.
Batchelder suggested that the Commission request the MAC to report on
AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELATIDNS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES 2 �
how the crossing pattern is being implemented and whether the FAA is using
this procedure during non-simultaneous periods. He suggested that the
Commission focus on why the City is still experiencing 5:00 a.m. departures
over residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Gross agreed with
Administrator Batchelder. He stated the Commission/Council should pursue
a court injunction since there seems to be a direct violation ofi a specific
tower order. Commissioner Des Roches agreed but added that she would
like to see specific data before pursuing court action.
Batchelder inquired further about specific changes to the Action Plan.
Commissioner Des Roches stated that she does not want to include, within
the Action Plan, fanning of aircraft. She stated that she welcomes additional
material/education regarding this concept. She noted that by adding this
goal to the Action Plan, it may send a message to the Council and
community that the Commission is pursuing a goal that is incompatible with
the entire Action. Administrator Batchelder inquired about the Commission's
priority in fanning aircraft.
Commissioner May suggested that the fanning option should be prioritized
and that it be included as a noise reduction issue.
Chair Beaty stated that he is looking for equity of the current runway use
-) system. Batchelder stated that with the construction of the north/south
� runway, 37 percent of the departures will depart off the north/south runway
and that departures from 1 1 L will drop to 8 percent. Chair Beaty stated that
he cannot image that the Cities of Bloomington and Richfield will allow 37
percent of the departures to depart over their cities. He stated that
operations will increase over the years and that he believes the runways will
continue to be used as they are now. He stated that he does not believe
that with the new north/south runway, Mendota Heights will experience less
noise.
Chair Beaty stated that if Mendota Heights receives 8 percent of the
departures (with the construction of the north/south runway), why not
consider spreading that air noise across the City. Administrator Batchelder
inquired if the Action Plan's goal of narrowing the corridor is no longe� a
priority. Chair Beaty stated that specific neighborhoods within Mendota
Heights keep getting "burned" with air noise and that he would like to see
these neighborhoods get some relief. Commissioner May stated that he
concurs with Chair Beaty and that he believes there are some viable
alternatives in distributing air noise.
In response to a question from Chair Beaty regarding Commissioners living
! � AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES 3
north of Highway 1 10, Commissioner Gross stated that he does experience
some air noise. He stated that he is of the opinion that he would like to see
the Commission stay on "track" with their issues and goals related to
equitable distribution of air noise. He stated that this Commission needs to
maintain its credibility. He stafied that he believes revisiting fanning options
off of 1 1 L should be kept out of the Action Plan. Commissioner Des Roches
stated that she does not get much air noise and that she agrees with
Commissioner Gross about maintaining the Commission's credibility.
Chair Beaty stated that he would like to see the Commission educated
further on Braslau/Collette study. Administrator Batchelder suggested that
Page 3 of the Action Plan be changed to read:
Issue:
Goal:
Action Steps
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Revisit Fanning Options.
1. Receive outside expertise to educate
the Commission on how fanning
may affect communities.
Who When
ARC 1998
2. Research other airports implementation ARC/Staff
of fanning procedure
3. Explore history with MAC/St. Paul
airspace.
4. Explore opportunities and constraints
with FAA traffic control.
ARC/Staff
ARC/Staff
Commissioner May stated that he believes that the Commission should
revisit the fanning issue. He stated that this may be a political issue but that
the Commission has an obligation to pursue other noise abatement
procedures. •
Chair Beaty requested that staff send copies of the Braslau/Collette study in
the next Commission agenda packet.
The Commission was of the consensus to present the Action Plan to at the
September 2, 1997 City Council regular meeting.
DISCUSS JOINT WORKSHOP FOR
C
C
AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SSION M/NUTES 4 � '
NORTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY
AIRPORT RELATIONS' COMMISSIONERS
The Commission discussed topics of interest and planned the bus tour route.
The Commission discussed best times to view air traffic within the City of
Mendota Heights. Commissioners Stein indicated he would attend the
meeting.
DISCUSS LETTER AND V1DE0
FROM MR. RON FUSSELL
The Commission reviewed a letter and video from Mr. Ron Fussell, of 530
Abbey Way. The Comrnission noted the air traffic patterns and how specific
aircraft generate more noise than others. The Commission was interested in
noting how Mr. Fussell's interpretation of noisy aircraft changed. The
Commission expressed their appreciation in receiving the video and directed
staff to send a thank you letter to Mr. Fussell.
PRESENTATION ON NOISE - 8 P.M.
MR. BRIAN ADDIS - INSTRUCTOR AT
IRIVER HILLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that Mr. Addis had
canceled his presentation earlier in the day. It was noted that Mr. Addis had
been requested to help investigate a recent aircraft accident. Batchelder
stated that he would reschedule Mr. Addis' presentation.
Li1� J����'�
NOISE ABATEMENT DEPARTURE PROFILES
Administrator Batchelder reviewed a letter sent by Mayor Mertensotto to the
members of the Planning and Environment Committee - MAC regarding their
recent action to table discussion of the MASAC recommendation on Noise
Abatement Departure Profiles for one month. The Mayor's letter explains the
City's position on how vitally important that a Close-In Departure be adopted
for both ends of the paraflel runways for the MSP airport.
Commissioner May inquired if the City has considered reviewing this issue
with the City Attorney. He suggested that the City consider this option
because there appears to be a real inconsistency in how the MAC dictates
policies and procedures. He stated that by the City challenging MAC's
� � AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELATIONS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES 5
inconsistencies, the City will generate publicity that the MAC may not wish
to endure. May stated that it is hard for any court to ignore equal protection �
of the law. Commissioner Des Roches suggested sending a letter to the
MAC regarding Commissioner May's suggestion. Commissioner. May stated
that the City can only gain more respect in demanding equal protection. He
stated that staff/commission/council can tap into specific resources to help
generate facts and statistics to help its cause in comparing "apples to
apples".
MAC AND MASAC REPRESENTATIOIV
Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that he would be
attending the Executive Committee meeting on August 14 where the
committee will review the possible changes to the MASAC membership
roster.
COWIMUNITY STABILIZATION
WORKING GROUP - AUGUST 12, 1997
Administrator Batchelder explained that in 1996 the Noise Mitigation
Committee established by the MAC recommended that a Community
Stabilization Working group be formed to develop recommendations on noise (,
mitigation programs that could be submitted to the Minnesota Legislature.
He explained that according to the MAC, with the timing of this adoption of
the Committee recommendations and subsequent presentation to the
�egislature, action could not be taken for the 1997 session. In essence, the
MAC is now looking to develop potential recommendations for the 1998
session. He stated that staff will continue to monitor this working group's
discussions and follow our adopted Noise Mitigation Needs Statement.
PART 150 RESPONSE TO MS. RITA HUGHES,
2308 SWAN
Batchelder explained that the City had made a request on behalf of Ms.
Hughes, on Swan Drive, to insulate her home after seven other homes in her
neighborhood had received sound insulation.
Batchelder explained that the City has received a response from Mr. Steven
Vecchi, Manager of the Part 150 Pragram at MAC, that Ms. Rita Hughes'
request to have her home insulated using Part 150 funds has been denied.
Mr. Vecchi explained that Ms. Hughes's property is located on a block that
AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELATIONS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES 6 (
does not meet FAA criteria and therefore is not eligible for Part 150
modifications. The reason being that FAA guidelines stated that only blocks
that are intersected or completely contained within the outermost contour
boundary are eligible for the Part 150 Residential Sound Insulation Program.
Batchelder stated that Ms. Hughes' neighboring blocks (Blocks 21 and 22)
are eligible because they are intersected by the outermost DNL contour
boundary.
Commissioner Des Roches was excused at 9:10 p.m.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS
REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE
The. Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC agenda for July 22,
1997 and June 24, 1997 minutes.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC abbreviated Technical
Advisar's Report for June, 1997. Administrator Batchelder informed the
Commission that the ANOMS system is experiencing technical difficulties as
it relates to the new installation of equipment at the new control tower.
Apparently the new equipment in the control tower is not compatible with
the existing ANOMS equipment. The MAC is in the process of upgrading the
system so that it is compatible with the FAA's system.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Airport Noise Report for July.
The Commission acknowledged receipt MASAC Executive Committee
Agenda for August 14, 1997 and July 11, 1997 Minutes.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Operations Committee
Agenda for August 14, 1997 and Minutes of July 15, 1997.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Eagan ARC Agenda for August
12, 1997.
�, � AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SSlON M/NUTES 7
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Airport Relations Commission moved to `
adjourn its meeting at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
AUGUST 13, 1997 A/RPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SS/ON M/NUTES 8 ��
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
September 5, 1997
To: Airport Relations Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, City Administrator
Subject: Unfinished and New Business for September 10, 1997 Meeting
DISCUSSION
This memo is to provide an introduction to each of the items listed under Unfinished
and New Business for the September 10, 1997 meeting.
1. Comprehensive Plan - Issues Identification - Ms. Meg McMonigal and Mr. Marc
Wiegle, of McCombs Frank Roos Associates, are contracted with Mendota Heights to
update the City's Comprehensive Plan, which is due to the Metropolitan Council in
1998. The initial stage of the planni.ng process is issue identification and the planners
are conducting interviews of all interested parties and individuals to discover all the
important issues. They have requested a spot on your agenda to discuss airport issues
with the Commission. (Please see attached letter.)
2. Report on Citv Council Action on the Airport I'lan of Action - At the September 2,
1997 meeting, the Airport Relations Commission's recommended Plan of Action was
presented to the City Council for discussion and approval. The City Council was very
appreciative of the work by the Commission to update the plan and the progress made
by the Commission over the last year.
City Council did make some changes to the list of high, medium and low priorities that
was recommended by the Commission. I have attached the new list, as prioritized by
City Council, as well as, the recornmended list of priorities that was updated by the
Commission on August 13, 1997 for your comparison. (Please see attached Action
Plan. )
Conidor Definition/Compliance Issues was felt to be a priority by the City Council and
the issue of the Metropolitan Council's "Noise Zone Maps" has become a hat topic
since the last commission meeting. The Noise Zone Maps will be discussed later in this
memo. Global Positioning Satellites and Nighttune Restrictions on Aircraft Operations
were dropped to medium priority issues. Monitoring the Third Parallel Contract was
moved to Low Priority Issues, which was then retitled as Issues to be Monitored.
' i
' ._
On the issue of fanning aircraft outside the existing conidor, City Council requested
that this item be removed from the Plan of Action prior to its presentation to City
Council. Council felt that this was inconsistent with our efforts over the years to (
nanow the corridor and would send a signal to outside agencies that we were willing to
take more planes. In discussions with the City Council, they thought this issue could,
and should, be studied by the Commission, but that it should not be advertised through
our Action Plan. The Plan of Action has been amended to reflect Council's wishes.
3. Review Proposed Exhibits for Third Parallel Contract - Recently the City received
correspondence from Mr. Nigel Finney with copies of proposed exhibits to be added to
the contract that the City signed with MAC last year to prohibit construction of a third
parallel runway. Mr. Finney is asking the City to review the proposed exhibits and
decided which we prefer. (Please see attached August 20, 19971etter.)
Also attached is a copy of the signed contract. According to the contract, in Section
II.4, an affected property owner is an owner of real property which property is within
that part of the City which:
a. would be brought into the 60 LDN noise contour as a result of
operations on the third parallel runway; or
b. is within the 60 LDN contour as determined without the third parallel
runway and which would experience a 1.5 or greater LDN increase as a
result of operations on a third parallel.
The attached maps represent these two definitions of an affected property owner. The
City reserves the right to review and approve these maps, which will then become
e�ibits to the contract. The Commission shouid make a recommendation to City
Council after discussing these proposed exhibits.
4. Ap�point Member to Subcommittee - Because of a recent land use issue involving a
proposal to subdivide and develop 60 twin home units within the new DNL 65 contour,
the City Council desires to appoint a subcommittee to review this issue. This
subcommittee will also explore whether or not it is prudent for Mendota Heights to
proceed with a legislative agenda for an elected, or redistricted, MAC and MASAC.
The Auport Relations Committee is to have one member on this subcommittee and
should choose the appropriate member.
5. Review Met Council Noise Zone Polic,�as - On August 19, 1997 we received the
new noise zone policy area maps from the Met Council. For the first time we have an
official DNL 65 that crosses Dodd Road and includes portions of Friendly Hills and
Bridgeview Shores. This creates a number of land use compatibility, development and
noise attenuation issues for Mendota Heights, which the above mentioned subcommittee
is to begin addressing. I will be prepared to present this new information to the
Commission on Wednesday eveni.ng. (Please see attached memo and map.)
Sep, �, 1997 12;18PM MCGOMBS FP,ANk ROOS No, 6957 P, 2/2
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, inc.
1505Q 23rd Avenue North, Ptymou[h, M(nnesota 55447-4739 Telephone Engineers
612/a�6-6010 Pianne�s
61?J476-8532 FA�t Sun+eyors
September 4, 199?
Dear Airport Relations Commission Members:
The City of Mendota Heights has retained McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFR.A) to upd.ate
its Comprehensive Plan. We have recently been interviewing lazge property owners and
sun�oundi.ng communities and jurisdictions to identify key issues and concerns. As part of that
process, we wish to discuss with you issues related to the airport. We wili attend the Airport
Relations meering on September 10. The followi.ng is a short list of questions we would. like to
use as a starting point for discussion.
1. What w�as/is the �irport Rela�ions Commission's role in the past? Present? Futuxe?
2. What axe the City's mast important policies in relation to the Au.port?
3. How can the Ciry deal moze effectively with airport issues?
4. Should. the City establish staged development in the noise zones, a.xtticipating that the
noise zone areas will be decreased in the future?
�. What other issues or concerns shauld we take into account in our Comprehensive
Planaing?
We look forLvard to meeting with you. If you have any questions please call Meg McMonigai or
Marc Weigle at 476-6010. _
Kindest regazds,
%��. i
Mazc J, eigle
Planner
An Equa! Opportuniry Empioyer
C
MINIVEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
TOPICS OF INTEREST
Updated and Prioritized August 13, 1997
HIGH PRIORITY ISSUES
1. MAC and MASAC Representation.
2. Equity of Current R�nway Use System.
3. Noise Abatement Departure Profiles.
4. Global Positioning Satellite Technology.
`�r`v � os-�� `a`�
�'pvv�w�tSS � o �
5. Nighttime Restrictions on Aircraft Operations.
MEDIUM PRIORITY ISSUES
6. MSP Long-Term Comprehensive Planning Issues - Expansion of Existing
Airport.
7. Prevention of Third Parallel Runway - Monitoring Contract with MAC.
8. Noise Measurement Issues - a. Usefulness of Ldn 65 Contour
b. Expansion of MAC Aircraft Noise Operations
Monitoring System (ANOMS).
9. Implementation of MSP Mitigation Committee's Comprehensive Plan.
LOW PRIORITY ISSUES
10. Corridor Definition/Compliance Issues.
1 1. Non-Simultaneous. Departure Procedures.
12. Metropolitan Council "Noise Zone Map" Update and Related Land Use
Controls.
13. Phase Out of Noisy Stage II Aircraft.
14. Aircraft Engine Run-Up Noise and Aircraft Ground Noise During Periods of
Departure Over Minneapolis.
TOPICS97.INT
C
. � i � • � � �
FOCUS ISSUES
1. Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
A. Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Procedures
B. Adoption of "Close In" vs. "Distant" Departure Procedures
C. Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations
D. Implementation of Narrowed Air Tra�c Corridor
2. Hei�hten Awareness of Mendota Hei�hts Air Noise Concems
A. Advertising the MAC Air Noise Complaint Line
B. Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information
C. Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
, � D. Advocate for Equitable MASAC and MAC Representation
3. MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
A. Monitor Contract with MAC on Third Parallel Runway
B. Implement MSP Mitigation Committee's Comprehensive Plan
4. Conversion to Stage III Quieter Aircraft
5. Noise Reduction Through Liti�ation
6. Expand Eli ig bility for Part 150 Sound Insulation Pro�ram in Affected Areas
, ;
�
C
C
r
,' �
Issue:
Goal:
� � � � � � � •
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Takeoff Procedures Which
Minimize Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Steps:
1. Request Copy of Tower Order that
Implements NSDP's
2. Monitor Gompliance with Tower Order
3.
�
NSDP's - Request Compliance
Pursue Magnetic Shift Affect on
105 Degree Heading on 1 1 L
1
� i
Who
Staff
Staff/
ARC
Staff
ARC
When
July
Continous
Sept.
Staff/ARC FAA is
implementing
c
r" � ��
Issue:
Goal:
� � � � • � � �
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Adoption of "Close-In" vs. "Distant" Takeoff Procedures to Reduce
Noise Generation Over Mendota Heights.
Action Steps: Who When
1. Seek Political Assistance from Staff/ARC August
legislative leaders - Send Correspondence
to MAC
2. MAC Planning and Environment reports
recommendation to MAC.
3. MAC recommends to FAA procedure
to be implemented.
4. FAA implements tower order.
5. FAA begins NADPs.
2
t' ,
�
Staff/ARC August
Staff/ARC
Staff/ARC
Staff/ARC
C
Issue:
Goal:
� � � � � � � �
Noise Reduction Tlirough Modified Takeoff Procedures
Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations to Reduce Noise
Generation Over Mendota Heights
Action Steps•
1. Inquire with FAA Control Tower about
current head-to-head operations
Who
Staff
2. Suggest Using crosswind runway more ARG -
frequently during head-to-head operations.
3. Monitor MSP Mitigation Comprehensive Plan ARC/
designated Stage III only from10:30 p.m. Council
until 6:00 a.m. and assist MAC in Implementing
Voluntary Agreements with Airlines
3
( 1
When
August
Fall 1997
1997
C�
Issue:
Goal:
� � � ' � � • •
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Implementation of Narrowed Air Traffic Corridor which Minimizes
Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Steps Who When
1. Advocate for Maintenance of 5 mile final Staff/ARC Continuous
arrivals and 3 mile corridor for departures
2. Pursue the benefit of updating Tower
orders to original intent before shift
in magnetic headings
3. Presentation to Commission on GPS by
MAC or other expert (Mr. Harold Pierce)
4
r �
Staff/ARC Fa111997
Staff Fa111997
Issue:
Goal:
� � � � � • � •
Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information
Action SteQs: Who When
1. Continue to inform the community on Staff/ARC Continuous
ARC projects and concerns using the
City's newsletter and separate single
page mailings.
2. Work with Northern Dakota County Airport Staff/ARC Continuous
Relations Comrnission on possible Legislation
for MAC representation.
3. Mail letters and Heights Highlites to
State Senators and Representatives
regarding ARC issues
4. Invite guests to monthly ARC meetings
(i.e., Mr. Hamiel, Mr. Wagoner, State
elected officialsl
5. Expand coverage of air noise issues
by pursuing informational meetings with
editorial staffs of major papers
6. Continue to send press releases to
newspapers, State Senators and
Reps.
7. Update and Promote air noise
mitigation document.
5
( )
Staff Continuous
Staff Continuous
(Quarterly)
Staff 1997
Council
Staff Continuous
Staff/ARC Annually
r"
�.
� � � � • � � �
;
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
Action Steps:
Who
1. Discuss concerns with State Senators ARC/
and Reps. regarding composition of Council
MAC. Pursue legislation to amend
MAC Commissioner appointment process.
2. Discuss and Compare cities affected by ARC
air noise to MAC representatives
When
Dec. 97/Jan.98
..;
3. Review MASAC representation and ARC/Staff 1997/1998
MAC representation with Northern
Dakota County Airport Relations
Commission. Propose new structure and
representation on MASAC.
C:�
i' i
m
, ;
♦ � � � � � � �
Issue: MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Prevent Construction of Third North Parallel Runway
Action Steps: Who When
1. Monitor MAC Compliance with Contract Staff/ARC Continuous
2. Research MAC Acquisition of Bureau of
Mines property and MAC interest in off
airport properties in 3rd runway area
3. Monitor EIS Process for N/S Runway
4. Monitor ElS for 12,000 foot Runway
(' �
7
Staff 1997
Staff/ARC 1997/1998
Staff/ARC 1997
� � � � � � � �
Issue: MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Implement Noise Mitigation Requirements in MSP Mitigation
Committee's Comprehensive Plan
Action Steps Who 1fi/hen
1. Implement MAC's MSP Mitigation Plan Staff/ARC 1997/1998
a. MASAC Action Plan for Implementation
b. Joint Efforts with NDCARC
c. Dakota County Assistance
d. �egislative Assistance
8
( )
�
i'
1
Issue:
Goal:
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Conversion to Stage III Quieter Aircraft
Assure Conversion by Federal Deadline of Year 2000
Action Steps:
1. Work with MAC to assure 1996
legislation to convert to all Stage III
aircraft by Year 2000 is implemented
2. Consicler Backsliding of Stage III
Conversion `
3. MASAC Consideration of
Stage III compliance
0
Who
Staff
►-
ARC/Council
When
Completed
Upon response of
NWA
Periodic
C
� � � � � • � •
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Litigation
Goal: Determine Feasibility of a Legal Challenge to Current Air
Noise Distribution
Action Steps: Who When
1. Continue to be kept abreast of other Staff/ARC Continuous
communities' iss�es and possible
litigation process
2. Consider Freedom of Information Request Staff/ARC 1997
for EIS or FONSI's on Increased
Operations
3. Consider Legal Challenge Options if Staff/ARC 1997/1998
NorthJSouth Runway is Delayed
10
( J
C
� � � ■ � • � •
Issue: Expand Eligibility for Part 150 Sound Insulation Program in Areas
Affected by Air Noise Exposure
Goal: Air Noise Mitigation Through Sound Insulation
Action Steps•
1. Continue to monitor changes in the Ldn
�
3.
�
contours and monitor the Part 150
Sound Insulation program completion
process.
Examine the feasibility of purchase or
acquisition through Part 150 for severly
impacted areas
Who When
Staff/ARC On-going
ARC/Council
Ensure ANOMS data used for Noise Contour Staff/ARC
Generation for 2005 Part 150 DNL 60
Updated August 1 1, 1997
ACTION.P�N
..;
..;
C�
�
�i� � ��� AGENDA
� -
�VIETROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT
COUiVCIL
Generai Meetinq
August 26,1997
7;30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m.
6040 28th Avenue South
� Minneapolis, Minnesota
1.
2.
3.
�
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Call to Order, Roll Call
Approval of Minutes of Meeting July 22,1997
Introduc#ion of Invited Guests
Receipt of Communications
Technical Advisor's Runway System Utilization Report and Camplaint
Summary
ANOMS Status
GPS Update — John Foggia, MAC
Operations Cammittee Meeting Update — Marac Salmen
Executive Corr�mittee nAeeting Update — Bob Johnson
Repo�t of the iVIAC Commission Meeting
Persons Wishing to Address the Council
Other ttems Not on the Agenda
Adjournment
. Next Meeting:
j j September 23, 199?
C
�
MINUTES
METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUPID ABATEMENT COUNClL
GENERA� MEETING
July 22, 1997
7:30 p.m.
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Call to Orde�, Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bob Johnson at 7:30 p.m. and the secretary was
asked to cail the roll. The following members were in attendance.
Mark Salmen
Brian Bates
Brian Simonson
Robert Johnson
RonJohnson
Dick Keinz
Steve Minn
John Richter
Joe Lee
Judith Dodge
Scott Bunin
John Nelson
Vem Wilcox
Dawn Weitzel
K�istal Stokes
Mayor Mertensotto
Lance Staricha
Mayor Egan
Ed Porter
Verdon Kleimenhagen
Dale Hammons
Advisors
John Aamot
Ron Glaub
Traci Erickson
Chad �eqve
Visitors
Borys Polec
NWA
Airbome �
DHL Airways
MBAA
ALPA
MAC
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
St. Paul
Bloomington
Bloornington
Richfield
Richfield
Mendota Heights
Eagan
Eagan �
Bumsville
Bumsviile
Inver Grove Heights
.FAA
FAA-CMO
Technical Advisor
MAC
Minneapolis Resident
2. Approvai of Minutes
The minutes of the May 27, 1997 meeting were approved as distributed. The minutes of the
June 24, 1997 meeting were approved as distributed with the addition of John Nelson, ,,
Bloomington, to the roster of attendees. �
3. Introduction of invited guests
Receipt of Communications
Cnairman Johnson noted the guest speaker's name was Bill Albee not Tom Alby.
There were no invited guests.
There were no communications.
4. Runway Usage and Comalaint Summarv
Traci Erickson, Technical Advisor, briefed the council on the abbreviated Technical Advisor's
Report. She noted the only information available for June was:
1. The scheduled fleet mix based on scheduled flights at MSP from the official airiine guide.
2. A summary and breakdown of complaints, along with a complaint map.
3. The Airport Traffic Record from the FAA.
4. Available runway usage times reported by the FAA.
John Richter, Minneapolis, asked why Inver Grove Heights had such a large number of
cornplaints in one month. Traci Erickson, Technical Advisor, said approximately 315 of the 638
complaints were from one address. Mr. Richter asked if the person had legitimate complaints. ��
Ms. Erickson said that ail noise complaints were legiiimate. She said staff had often spoken
with the individual providing him with information regarding airport operations.
Joe �ee, Minneapolis, asked about the complaints from Minneapolis. TraGi Erickson, Technical
Advisor, said a majority of the complaints came from five households but that they were spread
across the city.
Dawn Weitzel, Richfield, asked why the total number of compiaints for June was higher than for
the month of May. Traci Erickson, Technical Adviso�, said the total number of complaints
always goes up during "open window season" when the weather is nicer and people are outside
more.
5. ANOMS Update
Traci Erickson, Technical Advisor, announced the FAA, as of July 1, 1997, would store the
ARTS data on optical disks provided by the MAC.
Ms. Erickson also said staff had gone before the P&E Committee in July and recommended
MAC contract with ESRI to have Mansour Raad redesign the ANOMS program using "off the
shelf products. (She said the FAA preferred MAC not use a Direct Connect solution.) The P&E
committee approved the recommendation and the Full Commission approved it on Monday,
F�
Ju1y 21, 1997. Ms. Erickson said Mansour Raad was expected to come to Minneapolis the end
of August to begin work on the new program.
(
6. Operations Committee Meetinq Update — Mark Salmen
Mark Salmen, NWA, briefed the council on the July 15, 1997 Ope�ations Committee meeting.
He said Eagan's request to analyze the use of the corridor in regards to weather-related
diversions was approved. He said the month of August would be used for the analysis.
M�. Salmen said the main objective of the meeting was to review staff s findings regarding the
Minneapolis Straight out Analysis. Mr. Salmen read the motion from the Operations Committee
Meeting minutes and noted the FAA would be reviewing the proposal further.
Mr. Salmen also noted that the MASAC NADP recommendation had gone to the July P&E
cammittee, but was held over until a full brief could be given at the August meeting.
Mr. Salmen announced the ne� Operations Committee Meeting would be held on August 15,
1997 at 10:00 a.m. at the West Terminal conference room.
Joe Lee, Minneapolis, said it was important to note the FAA representative at the Operations
Committee meeting did not believe there would be any problems with approving and
implementing the proposal. Mr. Salmen said that was true because the FAA would only have to
woric within a 5-mile radius of the airport, but it still needed to be approved by the region and be
looked at for any possible environmental impacts.
7. Executive Committee Meetin� Update — Rabert Johnson
� � ChaiRnan Johnson briefed the council on the July 11, 1997 Executive Committee meeting. Mr.
Johnson noted that the review of the MASAC by-laws as they pe�tain to council membership
was turned over to staff for analysis. Mr. Johnson said it was important for council members to
review the minutes of the meeting and submit any comments in writing or verbally to him before
the next meeting, which was set for August 14, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. in the West Terminal
conference room.
8. Distinguished Guest — Bill Albee FAA Noise Ombudsman
John Foggia, MAC Aviation Noise 8� Satellite Manager, introduced Bill Albee of the FAA.
Mr. Afbee said he had been in Minneapolis the past few days visiting family in South
Minneapolis and had had a chance to experience some of the aircraft noise in and a,round MSP.
He said he believed the only way to effectively deal with noise problems was to have routine,
regular meetings between the affected parties, such as MASAC has. .
Mr. Albee said the federal legislature passed a law last fall requiring the FAA to appoint an
Aviation Noise Ombudsman. He said his position as Ombudsman includes two basic functions:
To be consulted by air traffic personnel whenever there is a proposed change in a flight
path. Mr. Albee's �oll is to be sure an appropriate public process has been implemented
3
before a new flight path is approved.
2. To serve as a liaison with the public regarding aviation noise. He said noise complaints
are usually referred to the local FAA or airport. He said he also coache� people on what
questions to ask local officials. (-
John Richter, Minneapolis, asked Mr. Albee to comment on the decision by GeRnan officials to
move their airport in order to eliminate aviation noise problems in the urban area.
Mr. Aibee said it was primarily an economic question. He said the aviation industry in America
had become an accepted part of the economy. He said he recognized those people living near
airports bore the burden of aircraft noise. He said he knew the problem of aircraft noise had
not been universally resolved and there were challenges in this area. He noted that when the
Denver airport was moved they received more noise complaints than ever before because they
moved the aircraft noise to an area that had no aircraft noise previously. He said moving
airports wasn't necessarily the resoiution to aircraft noise problems. He said local communities
would have to determine the acceptable level of aircraft noise. He said the federal government
has� a standard of 65 DN� as a level of significant impact. He noted that the federal
govemment pays out millions of dollars in an effort to abate aircraft noise around airports. He
said some airports do a better job than othe�s, and MSP was one of the best models for noise
abatement.projects and policies.
John Richter, (Wlinneapolis, said MSP was running out of capacity and was one ofi the smallest
airports in the.country.
Mr. Albee said at least 40 other airports in the United States are experiencing capacity
problems. He noted that in order to add capacity airports have to build more runways, which
usually results in destroying residential areas. He emphasized the FAA was only one party in
the aircraft noise p�oblem. He said communities and their elected officials play a big part in �'
resolving the problem.
Steve Minn, Minneapolis, told Mr. Albee he believed actual noise data should be used for
creating the Part 150 contours rather tfian modeled data. He said he was asking Mr. Albee for
assistance in that endeavor. Mr. Albee said the problem was most airports do not have the
noise data MSP has. Mr. Minn asked if it would be possible for MSP to be a demonstration
project for such a model. Mr. Albee said the INM model is specified for gene�ating Part 150
contours or any other method approved by the FAA. He said no airport has submitted a
contour using any other model than the INM. Mr. Albee said if MAC presented the FAA with a
proposal to incorporate real noise data into the contour generation, he would facllitate having
the FAA give it full consideration.
Tom Egan, Eagan, weicomed Mr. Albee to the Twin Cities and to the NUISE convention in
Eagan. N1r. Egan asked Mr. Albee if the posiiion of Aviation Noise Ombudsman had a budget
and if it had a work program that established goals and objectives. Mr. Albee said the role of
Ombudsman is to only get involved in a local issue when requested to by a local person. He
said the role of an Ombudsman is to handle complaints. He also said there was no budget for
ongoing travel, but that he was allowed to travel to national meetings.
Lance Staricha, Eagan, noted that MASAC had been working on NADPs recently and asked
Mr. Albee if there was only one set of paramete�s for the Distant and Close-in procedures and if
C
0
there was much of a difference between the two procedures.
Mr. Albee noted that the two NADPs developed were for safety reasons. He said airiines were
using a number ofi different departure procedures, which prompted the FAA and the industry to
� ' decide on a standard cfose-in and far-out procedure. He said the parameters were set for
safety reasons, and he didn't believe there was a big difference between the two procedures.
Dale Hammons, Inver Grove Heights, asked if there were only two procedures to choose from.
Mr. Albee said he wasn't sure if there was a"standard" depa�ture procedure still on the books.
He said most ai�iines chose a close-in or far-out procedure.
Ron Glaub, FAA, said the Advisory Circular directed the ai�lines to develop two departure
procedures, one for close-in and one for far-out. He also said he didn't think it was fair to say
that there was little difference between the two procedures. .
Joe Lee, Minneapolis, commented that he felt the use of averages in developing the 65DNL
contour was misleading. He said all questions are not resolved by simply meeting the average.
He said it should be an area of sensitivity for the FAA.
Mr. Albee noted that there was a correlation between high averages and high actual decibel
levels. Although he said more research into calculating cumuiative noise impact will be
necessary as ope�atians grow and when there is an all Stage III fleet. Mr. Albee also noted that
he had developed a policy guideline proposal for communities to help them address noise
issues at lower decibel levels (less than 65DNL). He said it's p�imarily targeted at building
codes and real estate transaction disclosures.
Ed Porter, Burnsville, asked if the FAA would hold to the all Stage III fleet requirements by the
year 2000.
M�. Albee said the proposed waiver standards are very tough and doesn't e�ect any waive�s to
be granted. He noteti that there are still about 1,700 Stage II aircraft in service, about half of
the originaf number of Stage II aircraft at the time the law was implemented. He said most
airlines have achieved compliance through growth. He said he p�ojected there would still be
about 1,000 Stage II aircraft in service by January 1, 1997. He said the major benefit from the
disappearance of Stage II aircraft will occur in 1999. He said MSP would experience it even
more because Northwest Airiines has more Stage II aircraft than most other carriers in the U.S.
He said most of the noise reduction benefit for MSP is to come.
Mr. Albee also said because Northwest Airiines has chosen to hush-kit their DC-9 fleet rather
than buy all new Stage ��� ae� than h shed DC!9's� athoughrthey stel qualiiy as S age la ae craft.
aircraft are qwte a bit qu�e
9. Report of the MAC Commission Meetinq
Chairman Johnson briefed the councii on the July 21, 1997 Commission meeting. He said
there was a presentation from MAC staff for adding an additional 5,000 parking spaces by
expanding the current ramp and basically duplicating it. He said that a"people move�' would
h a v e t o b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e plan, as well. He said if the total package is completed as planned
there will be about 7,500 additional public parking spaces and 3,0 0 0 spaces for r e n t a l c a r s. H e
5
reported the cost of the project was projected to be $100 million. Chairman Johnson said the
Commission also approved an increase in long-term parking rates, which is expected to affect
1/3 of the people who park at the airpo�t.
Chairman Johnson said the second presentation was in regards to the cargo facilities at MSP. <
He said the cargo facilities are pretty well filled up. He said presently about 6 million pounds of
freight are diverted by truck to Chicago O'Hare. He said in the plan for the new North/South
runway there are a number of spots that have been identified as possible cargo locations.
Chairman Johnson also noted that Jim Fortman, Director of Airport Development, would be
retiring at the end of the month from MAC. He said Jim Thome was selected as the new
director. He said Mr. Thorne was at one time the property director for Northwest Airlines and
for the last 5 years has been with America West.
10. Persons Wishinq to Address the Council
Mr. Borys Polec of Minneapolis told council members that he was unable to sleep the night
before due to late night flights. He said between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. people should
be able to sleep without aircraft noise. .
John Aamot, FAA, said the controlle�s had only one runway to use the night before because the
other n�nways had been closed by MAC operations. Mr. Aamot noted that the FAA controllers
could not begin head to head operations in the comdor until midnight. Traci Erickson,
Technicai Advisor, said she would check with the MAC Ope�ations department to find out why
the runways were closed.
11. Other Items Not on the Aqenda
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked when and where the next Executive Committee meeting �'
would be held. Chairman Johnson said it would be at 10:00 on August 14`h in the West
Terminal Building. PVIr. Nelson asked where comments should be directed. Chairman Johnson
said they should be directed to him. Mr. Nelson asked if it would be possible for all members of
MASAC to receive the meeting notice of the next Executive Committee. Traci Erickson,
Technica! Advisor, said the meeting notice and the previous minutes would be sent to all the
members of MASAC. She also reiterated that the committee would not be making a final '
. decision. She said the full MASAC council would need to vote on any proposal from the
Executive Committee.
STEVE MINN, IVIIFNNEAPOLIS, MOVED AND JOE LEE, MINNEAPOLIS, SECONDED TO
DIRECT STAFF THROUGH THE OPERATIONS COAAMITTEE TO BEGIN REVIEWING THE
POSSOBILITY OF INCORPC?RATING REAL NOISE DATA INTO THE CONTOUR
GENERATION FOR THE PART 150 PROGRAM. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOT10N
CARRIED.
Traci Erickson, Technical Advisor, said a proposal for analysis could be discussed at the
September Operations Committee meeting. Dale Hammons, Inver Grove Heights, said he
would like to see staff use both ANOMS data and overflight data to anaiyze noise impacts.
C
�
12. Adiournment
ChaiRnan Johnson adjoumed the meeting at 8:50 p.m
Respectfully submitted
Melissa Scovronski, MASAC Secretary
r �
�
n�i�uTEs
NIASAC EXECUTIVE COnIINiITTEE
AUGUST 14,1997
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission MASAC Room and called to
order at 10:10 a.m.
The foilowing members were in attendance:
Bob Johnson- Chainnan — MBAA
Tom Hueg — St. Paul
Jennife� Sayre - NWA
Didc Keinz — MAC �
John Richter - Minneapolis
Kevin Batchelder - Mendota Heights
Guests:
John Nelson — Bloomington
Jon Hohenstein — Eagan
Dawn Weitzel — Richfield
Joe Lee — Minneapolis Representative
Jim Serrin — Minneapolis
Mark Salmen — NWA Representative
AdVISON:
Traa Eridcson - MAC
Chad Leqve — MAC
John Foggia — MAC
AGENDA
MASAC MEMBERSHIP IMPACT ANALYSIS
Chairman Johnson summarized the comments to the motion by Jenn'rfer Say�e at the July 11,
1997 Executive Committee meeting. (Copies of the comments are attached.)
Chairman Johnson said the comments were wide ranging and induded comments having to do
with the direction and purpose of MASAC, as well as additional statements and thoughts from
the cities of Bloomington and Eagan.
Joe Lee, Minneapolis, said he took exception to the length of the comments from Bloomington
and said they were not completely relevant t�o the motion being discussed.
Tom Hueg, St. Paul, said he thought the NADP vote was what preapitated the discussion on
representation and that that vote would not have been any different had their been a change in
the representation of MASAC. He said basically only two communities were affected by that �
vote.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, noted that the dist�ssion of proportional representation
was first brought up at an Executive Committee meeting in March 1997 when the membership
of Sunfish Lake was discussed and voted on. He said he didn't think it was fair to frame the
representation issue as one community against another community on one vote. He said the
issue of representation was based on more than the NADP issue and had � been an issue for
many years. -
Chairman Johnson asked Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, if it was true that Mendota
Heights was building a new development within the 65 DNL contour. Mr. Batchelder said that .
was not true.
Traa Eridcson, Technical Advisor, said she tielieved the issue of representation was a
symptom of a larger problem. She said former MAC Commissioner and MASAC Chairperson
Jan DelCalzo's comments at the last P8�E Committee meeting that MASAC wasn't
accomplishing anything was the main concem for MASAC. She said there had also been a
number of MASAC representatives who expressed the same belief.
Tom Hueg, St. Paul, noted that although the issue of representation began at the March
Executive Committee meeting, it still has come down to one community versus another rather
than the metropolitan area woricing as a whole.
John Nelson, Bloomington, said he believed one of the issues before the committee would be a �
ruling on the validity of the motion being considered. He said he believed the motion was in
conflict with the by-laws. He said changes in representation, as written in the by-laws, would
have to take into account population changes and not parce! counts. Mr. Nelson, at the
request of Joe Lee, Minneapolis, read the portion of the by-laws he was referring to:
Article II. Number 4
Changes in the composition of the Council or in the user and/or public
representation thereon, through amendment of the Articles of Incorporation
and/or the By-laws, shall be entertained to pennit active participation of
additional membe�s in the USER or PUB�IC caiegories or as may be required
to reflect maierial changes in the population o�(o� directly effected
govemmental units or change in the impact on govemmental units by reason of
changed flight pattems.
A discussion of a possible typographical error ensued (noted above as italicized). (Please�note
that there was in fact a typographical error made in the 1984 revisions of the by-laws and
should read "...to reflect matenal changes in the population of directly effected govemmental
Un�.cf. ....n) �
C
Mr. Nelson said that, although he didn't feei the use of parcel counts wasn't interesting, he
believed the motion should be rescinded as a pariiamentary procedure.
John Richter, Minneapolis, said he believed the comments from the ciiy of Bioomington
refiected a partisan attitude toward noise abatement. He suggested that the city of
Bloomington was trying to protect their �esidents rather than support proportional
representation for the people who received the most aircraft� noise. He said 'rf the membership
did not reflect propo�tional representation, MASAC was "just a shell game" and should be
disbanded.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he did not believe the members of MASAC would be
able to make a deasion on representation due to the "quibbling" between communities. He
said he thought it should be up to MAC Staff and the Commission to deade 'rf MASAC should
continue and if any changes should be made. He said the City of Mendota Heights was not
interested in arguing with the other 6 communities over the structure of MASAC.
Dick Keinz, MAC, asked John Richter, Minneapolis, where he thought MASAC got off track
from its global view of noise abatement. Mr. Richter said MASAC worked up to �the tirne of
airiine deregulation. Mr. Keinz also said he agreed with Mr. Batchelder that MASAC membe�s
would probabiy not be able to agree on membership and asked why membe�ship had to be
changed. He said what the members of MASAC needed was a change in perspective. M�.
Richter said he didn't believe people could change their perspectives because not everyone
shares the noise. Joe Lee, Minneapolis, commertted that the original purpose of MASAC was
to find ways to share the noise and that wasn't happening. They both said there was no
incentive for other communities to help alleviate the noise over Minneapolis. Dick Keinz, MAC,
said he felt Bloomington, for instance, cared very much about the level of noise over
Minneapolis. Mr. Richter said he didn't believe they did because nothing has happened. Mr.
Keinz said he felt the reason for the increase in dissafisfaction wasn't because of the make up
of MASAC but because the airport had become busier and that the airport was still in
Minneapolis. M�. Richter said he didn't debate that that was a problem, but that since it was a
problem, Minneapolis should have proportional representation. Mr. Richter said that if
membership didn't change to reflect proportional representation, he would recommend
Minneapolis withdraw frs�m MASAC. �
Dale Hammons, Inver Grove Heights, said he feft MASAC hadn't accomplished anything in the
two years he had been a member, but that it wasn't because of inembership representation.
He said he would rather see MASAC acxomplish something than ta argue about membership.
Chairman Johnson noted that the New Noise Management Methodology, Noise Abatement
Departure Profiles and Crossing in the Corridor had been accomplished by or through MASAC.
He said in the beginning it was easy to make changes. Yet, as time has gone on, the ability to
make major changes has diminished.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, said deregulation and an increase in population closer to the flight
tracks has made it more difficult to direct increasing traffic over relatively unpopulated areas.
He reiterated that there were diminishing retums in what could be done. He said all this has
led to gridlock and wasn't sure if a change in membership would make a difference, but if it
would, then it should be proportional. He emphasized that communities that have not
developed residential areas under flight paths should not be penalized for good planning.
Chairman Johnson asked staff to present the membe�ship analysis.
John Foggia, MAC, wamed members that if a decision about MASAC is given to MAC staff
MASAC would lose the ability to make decisions not only on the structure of MASAC, but on
various noise abatement issues, which had already happened. He said MAC staff has
competing priorities and aircraft noise was only one of them. He also said the effort to change
the distribution of votes was leading to an inc�ease in the tendency toward paroc;hialism, which
was in conflict with efforts to increase cooperation among the members.
MASAC Results: Parcel Consideration — Ovefiead #1
Mr. Foggia said the analysis incorporated the 60 DNL contour, and that single and multi-family
parcels within that contour had been counted for each community. He said the analysis used
the same methodology that was used for the Noise Mitigation Committee analysis. He noted
the percentage for each community shown o� the ovefiead was the percentage of total
parcels affected under the 60DNL. contour within that community. !�e said each community
received one base vote and the remaining 7 votes were redistributed based on the percentage
of parcels by city under the DNL contour. Using parcels as the only consideration would take
two votes fram St. Paul and give two more to Minneapolis.
The overhead also showed the relative noise impact for each community, which was
represented by the number of tracks and a corresponding average DNL. The number of tradcs
listed was the same sample of data used for the Minneapolis Straight Out analysis. The
following runway departures and arrivals were used for the respective communities:
. Minneapolis —11 arrivals and 29 departures
. Mendota Heights — 29 arrivals and 11 departures
. Eagan — 29 arrivals, 22 departures and 11 departures
. Inver Grove Heights — 29 arrivals and 11 departures
. Bloomington — 04 arrivals and 22 departures
. Richfield —11 arrivals, 29 departures, 22 departures and 04 arrivals
. St. Paul — 04 departures and 22 arrivals
. Bumsville — 22 departures,ll R departures and 04 arrivals
. St. Louis Park —11 arrivals and 29 departures
. Sunfish Lake —11 l. departures and 29R arrivals
Mr. Foggia said since overflights didn't take into account the elevation of an airplane over a
parcel, an average decibel level was determined. Since each block in the 65 DNL contour had
already been given a DNL value for the Part 150 Prioritization Map, each parcel was assigned
the DNL value of its block based on this map. The average DNL value for each of the cities
was then calculated by adding up the DNL value for each parcel and dividing it by the number
of parcels in each city in an attempt to "parameratize" the impact. Mr. Foggia noted that since
the 60 DNL did not reach St. Paul, Bumsville and St. Louis Park, they were given an arbitrary
DN� value of 60. And, since there we�e no DNL pnontization values for Inver Gr�ve Heights�
��
and Sunfish Lake, but the 60 DNL contour reaches them, they were assigned a DN� value of
61.
MASAC Results: Fli ht Track Consideration — Overhead #2
Mr. Foggia showed that 'rf flight tradcs were the only consideration, the distribution would be
more spread out. �'
MASAC Resufts• Overall Impact — Overhead #3
Mr. Foggia said 'rf the percentage of parcels was multiplied by the numbe� of flight tracks, the
City of Minneapolis would receive 7 membe�rs (votes). In this analysis, St. Paul would lose 2
votes and Bloomington would lose 1 vote, with the 3 extra votes going to Minneapolis. He said
the Overall Impact analysis, in essence, penalized those communities who have kept
populations out from under the flight paths.
There was a brief discussion regarding the farther out communities and their relative noise
impact:
Dawn Weitzel, Richfield, said she believed MASAC should look to other airport groups, such as
San Francisco's, for possible solutions and new approaches rather than looking inward and
holding MASAC up as the standard. She said it would be a good idea to reevaluate how
MASAC worked.
John Richter, Minneapolis, said San Franasco had a different situation because of the fact that
-- flights could be directed out over the ocean.
�:, )
Jim Serrin, Minneapolis, said he thought MASAC was accomplishing useful things, such as the
acquisition of ANOMS, the establishrnent of the Corridor, the NADP deasion, the attempt to
alleviate some straight out departures over Minneapolis, and the ongoing discussion of
shoulder hours and nighttime flights. Some of the things, he said, that have not been
accomplished are sudi things as a discussion about noise levels at other airports, the refusal
of any disaassion of the noise impact at possible new airport locations, the inability to educate
MAC on the impact of noise on people in the community, and the fact that the noise budget
had been broken and nothing was done by MASAC. He said the bottom lines was that
cammunities cauld only rely on the compassion of the airport and the airlines. He said he did
not think MASAC should be disbanded at this point.
John Nelson, Blaomington, �eite�ated � that the by-laws should be the mechanism by which
MASAC reviews the stipulatian of inembership. He said there were a number of communities
represented on the council that had experienced material changes in population counts. He
said he would suggest that if the analysis done by the staff were to be used for the basis of a
motion by the Exeaative Committee that the by-laws be changed to reflect parcel counts rather
than population. He also said he took exception to the belief of some membe�s of the council
that Bloomington "had it so good." He said Bloomington was currently involved in negotiations
in regards to the proposed new runway, which would affect Bloomington's noise levels. He
said Bloomington's overriding and underiying interest had always been in reducing aircraft
noise for all of the affected communities. He said Bloomington fuily supports the Noise
Mitigation Committee's recommendations even though it will mean changes in runway use.
Mr. Nelson compiimented the members of the Executive Committee on their discussion. He
�,
said he was impressed with the statesmanship of the members. He suggested that as MASAC
proceeds, that it keep in mind those issues in which common ground couid be found. He noted
that the USER groups should be an equal partner in these issues. He said MASAC should find
common ground where MASAC has a true partnership between staff, the airlines and the
residents. He reiterated that MASAC for the past three years has had a published objective
schedule and has accomplished much. He said he wished the Operations Committee had
done a better job of communicating the wo�ic being done to the membership as a whole. �
John Richter, Minneapolis, reiterated that the original Minneapolis recommendation called for a
two-year review of the membership to take into acxount changes in airport operati�ns.
Cfiairman Johnson said that the committee would not be able to act because (1) the issue of
parcel counts versus population counts in the by-laws needed to be resolved and (2) the
communities would need a ct�ance to review the analysis before voting. �
Joe Lee, Minneapolis, said he disagreed with Mr. Nelson's belief that the by-laws were in
conflict with the motion. �
Chairman Johnson said copies of the minutes and the analysis would be serrt to each of the
members for comment. He reiterated tha# this was the necessary public process. He darified
that the issue would then come back to the Executive Committee in September.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, requested that staff do a second analysis using the 65
DNL corrtour because that was the current contour being used. He said he didn't believe the
60 DNL contour should be conside�ed as the precedent for analyses for airport operations.
John Foggia, MAC, said he would be able ta do that analysis for the next Executive Committee
meeting, but thought that the only numbers that wouid change would be the number of parcels.
Jim Serrin, Minneapolis, said he didn't believe ther� was much difference between the 60 and
65 DNL corrtou�s. Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he was concemed that the people
between the 65 and 60 DNI. contours were being given the same consideration as those
people doser to the airport. He said he was concemed with the new 60 DNL benchmark.
John Foggia, MAC, said that the precedence had been set from the legislature, the Noise
Mitigation Committee, MASAC and the �est of the country. Mr. Foggia said he could provide
Mr. Batchelder with the spreadsheet used for the analysis.
Mr. Batchelder reiterated that he felt MAC staff would have to address the level of frustration
and ladc of direction at MASAC. .
Didc Keinz, MAC, said the people on MASAC now would stiil be on MASAC if the distribution of
votes changed and didn't think there would be any difiference in the voting. Joe �ee,
Minneapolis, said it came down to the concept of proportional representation. He said it was
important that MASAC, by some measure, reflect that.
C.
Traci Eridcson, MAC, asked that each person come back to the next meeting with suggestions
as to how MASAC can wo�ic better.
John Foggia, MAC, reiterated his recommendation that any decisions to be made regarding
MASAC be kept within the body. He said his staff would assist in finding an additional vote
from the USER side if needed to balance out the PUB�IC members.
The meeting was adjoumed at 11:40 a.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
( j �
•
.
�
•
r
C
�
r■�►
> •.
C
VERBAL COMMENTS TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITI'EE
MEMBERSHIP MOTION
Glenda Spiotta calted the MASAC secretary on August 7, 1997 to indicate Sunfish Lake's support for the
motion made by Jennifer Sayre, NWA, at the July 1 l, 1997 Executive Committee meeting with the
provision that Sunfish Lake retains at least one vote.
6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599
City Manager Mayor
James D. Prosser Martin J. Kirsch
August 5, 1997
Robert P. Johnson, Chair
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040- 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Mr. Johnson:
councii
Susan Rosenberg Kristal Stokes
Michael Sandahl Russ Susag
Richfield is a city highly impacted by adverse airport noise impacts. As the years progress, it
becomes harder to protect our residents and schools from the intrusive impacts of the nearby
airport. Residents routinely call the City of Richfield� and the Metropolitan Airports
Commission's Complaint Line to assert disapproval over extremely loud low flying planes, late
night and early morning flights, and airline run-ups. As a direct result of low frequency and
overflight impacts, the Richfield neighborhoods of New Ford Town and Rich Acres requested
that their homes be purchased by the Metropolitan Airports Commission.� The combined impact
of the noise and the future uncertainty of this location caused economic and social disinvestment.
Expansion of runways has brought forth a flurry of complaints from residents. Now that
additional runway length enables the larger international flights to take place, residents (who are
not within the DNL contour ranges projected in 1993) aze subjected to impacts at a much closer
range. The slow shift to Sta.ge III aircraft has been seen to bring forth little relief.
In the midst of current problems, the Minneapolis-St.� Paul International Airport will be
expanding. A new North-South runway is proposed to be added along the eastern border of the
city. And once again, the crosswind runway is proposed to be extended so as to accommodate
larger aircraft and distribute the in-flight air traffic over a larger area. The proposed extension to
4-22 and construction of a new runway would subject thousands of additional residents to
increased levels of noise. -
Operations to and from the south on this new runway together with increased tra�c on the
extended crosswind runway will impose extensive, persistent, pervasive, physical, financial, and
institutional impacts, primarily on portions of the City of Richfield, many of its residents,
businesses, schools, churches, and users of affected facilities. Effective and responsive
mitigation of these impacts will be as important to the success of the airport's expansion project
as design and construction of the airport facility itself.
The Urban Hometown
Telephone (612) 861-9700 • Fax (612} 861-9749
n c.,..ai .�'1..�... . . _,.-...,, _
Robert Johnson. Chair of MASAC
August 5, 1997
Page 2
And in the midst of this chaos, the City has a recommendation before them to decrease
representation on a sound abatement council designed to protect community members. Where is
the reasoning? To suggest that Richfield have one representative, the same as distant
communities, is simply ludicrous.
What are we hoping to accomplish by just revisiting MASAC representation? Is it equal
committee representation to residents impacted, or is it more voting power given to a particular
sector.
That is why the City of Richfield believes that it is the meaning of the committee that needs to be
revisited. Time and time again we are reminded about how dysfunctional MASAC operates.
What was once a public forum for residents to vent frustrations, has turned into frustration on the
part of technical members and MAC staff that residents are there in the first place. It is the
airport that has intruded on the lives of residents, not the other way around.
�.
We suggest revisiting the entire purpose of MA.SAC. Just looking at representation numbers is
not the answer to the problems that are so inherent to the committee. It is embarrassing that
what was once a committee emulated by other communities, has forgotten why they are there in �
the first place. To protect residents.
Materials from San Francisco's Airport/Corizmunity Roundtable have been included with this
letter. While the roundtable came together agreeing to disagree, goals and purpose have not been
lost. MASAC has simply become a power struggle between MAC staff, residents, community
representatives and airline representatives. On more than one occasion, residents and members
have been spoken to in a condescending manner. Again we reiterate, we are at the meetings to
help protect our communities. Residents are our community.
Thank you for your consideration of Richfield's suggestions.
Sinc rely
��,P-��'e� ,
.
G�i � ��,� ,
Kristal Stokes
Dawn Weitzel
MASAC Representatives
DMW:ttf
��.
July 28, 1997
�
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Attn: Melissa Scovronski
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Chair Johnson:
,
•.
THOMAS EGAN
Mayor
PATRICIA AWADA
BEA BlOM9UIST
SANDRA A. MASIN
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Members
THOMAS HED6ES
City Administrator
E. J. VAN OVERBEKE
City Cierk
Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on the potential chang� in
MASAC community representation.. The City of Eagan is extremely supportive af
modifying the proportional make-up of the NiASAC membership because of the
changes in runway use that have become necessary due to post-deregulation
growth and the population growth of our community. At the time that MASAC
was formed, traffic levels permitted substantially greater use of Runway 4/22 and
the corridor and Eagan was a township of approximately 10,000 people.
As was noted in the MASAC Executive Committee minutes, the parallel runways
today handle a significant majority of all operations. This places hundreds of.
aircraft over cammunities at the ends of those runways each day, while Runway
4/22 sees limited use. This is especially so because the Runway 4/22 extension
is not being used for traffic redistribution as had been anticipated originally.
Meanwhile, Eagan has grown to 60,OOQ residents. While Eagan has been
fortunate in being able to plan its residential development in areas farther from
the airport, the growth of airport traffic has impacted these areas dramatically.
Further, the expansion of the airport contemplates a new north-south runway
which will increase frequency and lower the altitude of operations over southern
and western Eagan.
As to specific comments pertaining to the analysis for a potential change in
membership: -
While population exposure to noise impacts is the obviaus, primary cr.iteria of
analysis, the contribution of the City of Eagan in providing an area of noise-
compatible land-uses shouad be considered in the analysis of community
representation so that Eagan is not penalized for its foresight and
responsibility. Otherwise, the City would have been better off from the
perspective of representation to have deveioped residential uses at the
runway ends. By extension, communities which have encouraged noise-
sensitive land uses within known noise-impact areas should not be rewarded.
tv1UNICIPAI CENTER
3830 p��G" KN�3 40AC
_AGA� P�tINN�50'� 5��22•18Q?
p..�.�^�_ i�.tG; bF 'u7�1
�Ax . ...', bc' -dC' -
"�� !0' 2` .:,:�-85..c
THE LONE OAK TREE
THE SYMBOL OF STREN6TH AND 6ROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Act�or �mplover
MAINTENANCE FACILITY
35�J' C:.+ACHtv1r1(v a'✓IN"
_AvA� ��^•, A
�, fvtlNN�.,.. .,_ i�
�..;�Nc ' _T' b5'-!3'J�
=G}, ' �y�F 'L'JOC
-�_ ,,, _. S5�-p53c,
• A proposal fihat provides for roughiy proportional representation northwest
and southeast of the airport is reasonable.
• A proposal that recognizes the minimal use of the cross-wind runway is aiso �
reasonable, unless the lengthened runway is used for redistribution of
operations as was originally intended. Unless that occurs, the analysis
should recognize that the area southwest of the airport currently has �
representation roughly proportional with the parallel runway ends, with
substantially less noise exposure.
• Since MASAC is intended to contribute input to the planning process for the
MAC and a new north-south runway is the intended expansion altemative, a
proposal that anticipates additianal traffic in east Bloomington, south and west
Eagan and north Burnsville should be considered.
• A proposal that recognizes that most destinations from MSP are southeast,
:south and southwest of the airport and over fly Eagan which is south and
southeast of the airport, regardless.of which runways are in use, is
reasonable. .
• While reallocation of the existing number of community representatives
eliminates the need to consider expansion of the number of user
representatives, the analysis should not be limited to the current number if a
slight increase in overall membership would achieve a better proportioned
representation of the communities. By the same analysis as is being applied
to the communities, it may not be unreasonable to add another representative
from the airport's home-based carrier, Northwest Airlines.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment in this regard. Please feel free (
to call me if you have questions about any of these comments.
Sincerely,
J Hohenstein
Assistant to the City Administrator
Cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Jon White, Airport Relations Commission Chair
JtA- 2 9 1997
July 18, 1997
Melissa Scovronski
MA.SAC Secretary
Metropolitan Aircra$ Sound Abatement Council
6040 28th Ave. S.
Minneapolis MN 55450
Dear Ms. Scovronski:
I support the motion by Ms. Sayre on July 11 in the Executive Committee session to direct
staffto perform an analysis of runway usage between 1978 and 1994 and to incorporate
parcel counts into the analysis in order to determine how membership representation may
be changed to reflect the change in aircra$ noise im�act.
There can be no argu.ment with the fact that the most seriously impacted communities are
those at both ends of the parallel runways. There also can be no argument that in our
system of government (proportional representation) those communities are justified in
expecting increased proportional representation on MASAC.
Statistics clearly demonstrate that approximately 90% of the aircraft noise generated by
aircraft landings and takeoffs is suffered by the cities at both ends of the parallel ruuways.
{-_� These cities are Minneapolis, Mendota Hei;hts, Eagan and to a lesser extent St. Louis �
Park and Richfield because of early turns on takeoffs to the southwest from the south
parallel. �
I also support the recommendation that noise impact statistics be reviewed every two
years by MASAC's staff and if after the review the statistics indicate a revision is
necessary in the proportional representation, that staff advise the council of it findings and
the council respond pro�ptly to their fmdings.
S' erely,
J seph . Lee
JEL/rls/.072$97
C
, . IC E� E
5905 Golden Valley Road, Goiden Valley, Minnesota 55422
612-546-3314 � FAX 612-546-3973
August I, 1997
Melissa Scovronski
MASAC Secretary
Metropolitau Aircr-aft Sound Abatement Cou�icil ��
60�0 28t1� Ave. S.
Minneapolis MN 5�=�50
Dear Ms. Scovronski:
' 4 1997
E��ery ten vears the United States has a censu:. When that is completed va�ious
�o��en�n�ental bodies adjust their boundii�s ba;ed c�n the number of ���c���l� i>> c,ich a;�c;�. .
Fvery citv eo�•enunent is also required to adjust the boui�da►ies of ea�h «ard based on the
census fisures. Tlie same �oes for federal IeQislati��e distiicts as �vr:ll as atate districts.
Ifwe have to ha�•e a representational $q�'eilifllCili �L'I11CI1 ao�•erns a(1 a��cn�:ic: chen ��e n�u;t
do the s�me for noise pullution.
Attacl�ed �re the bti� la��.�s.
lf'�i�e are unable to do this. MASAC no longer can be called a reprc:entati� � fi�r�n ot'
Qo��ernit�ent and probai�ly should be dissol�•ed.
Sincerel��.
John T. Richter
�TR.%risi.meiiissa
�
i
) city of
) bloomington, minnesota
� - 7 1997
2215 West Old Shakopee Road ■ Bloomington MN 55431-3096 •(612) 948-8930 � FAX: 948-8949 � TDD: 948-8740
July 31, 1997
Robert Johnson, Chairperson
MASAC Executive Committee
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
ATTN: MASAC Secretary, Melissa Scrovrinski
Dear Chairpersan Johnson:
Thank you for seekin.g comments on the proposed changes to the MASAC representation
numbers.
The proposed change, offered by Mr. John Richter of Minneapolis, reads as follows:
-, `Based on the present pollution, the membership should be 2 from Mendota Heights, 2 from
�.._ _-� Eagan and 1 from St. Paul. The reason being 51% of the noise is over the communities of Eagan
and Mendota Heights and 1-2% is over St. Paul. Minneapolis should go from 4 to 6 members as
the pollution is 50%. Richfield and Bloomington should be reduced from 2 to 1. These
percentages should be reviewed every two years to insure a balance."
After much discussion of the proposal on July 11, 199�, the MASAC Executive Committee
approved the following motion:
"Jennifer Sayre, NWA, motioned and Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota. Heights, seconded to
direct staif to perform an analysis of runway usage between 1978 and 1994 and to incorporate
pazcel counts into the analysis in order to detemline how membership representation may be
changed to reflect the change in aircraft noise impact. The current 1996 65 DNL contour will be
used as the pazcel count boundary."
;, . .1 u: _..
The bylaws of MASAC cover membership in Article II. Article II, Section 4, describes the.
composition of the membership; changes in the representation of the membership are covered in
the bylaws in the following pazagraph:
An AffiRnative Action/Equai Opportunities Employer
"Changes in the composition of the Council or in the user and/or public representation thereon, \
through amendment of the Articles of Incorporation and/or the By-laws, shall be entertained to
permit active participation of additional members in the USER or PUBLIC categories ar as may
be required to reflect material changes in the population or (sic) directly effected govemmental
units or change in the impact on governmental units by reason of changed flight patterns."
After carefully reading the bylaw section and both the proposal and subsequent motion given
above, it is appazent that neither the proposal nor the motion conform with the bylaws.
The bylaws clearly establish that only material changes in population, or flight pattems, or the
interest of new members in an active role in one of•the membership categories can be used as a
basis to change the composition of MASAC.
A review of the proposal and motion indicates neither meet the bylaw criteria for changing the
composition of the membership. First, the proposal does not consider population, and the motion
incorrectly directs staff to count "parcels." Further, the bylaws do not contemplate any form of
population other than the entire population of the affected government unit. Second, the proposal
and the motion do not consider flight patterns. "Flight pattems" is not a term used to describe
either runway use in terms of aircraft, or the available time that a runway couid be used, or the
percentage of use of a given runway relative to other runways "Flight patterns" is a term used to �, �
describe the flight tracks which are predominantly used to arrive and depart on any given
runway. It was the cleaz intent of the framers of the bylaws to allow for changes in.flight tracks,
for example, the "Burnsville turn," to be a reasonable cause for reviewing membership
composition. Similazly, the new 17-35 runway will introduce entirely new flight tracks that will
impact hitherto unaffected areas, such a change in flight patterns could, and shouid, cause
MASAC to revisit membership composition. Unfortunately, the gresent proposal does not pass
the flight track test. Third, neither the proposal nor the motion reflect the desire of an active �
participant to become a.new member in either the User or Public category. It was this provision
that was invoked to add Sunfish Lake, Inver Grove Heights, Burnsville, and St. Louis Pazk. The
intent of this section is not to adjust the representation permitted a given public member (which
is covered by the population/flight track criteria), but rather to allow wholly new members who
wish to actively participate, membership on the council.
'� i�- '�i� i i u' i• i
A complaint has been raised that when the membership on the public side expanded from 13 to
17 members, the percentage proportion of Minneapolis declined from 30.76% to 23.5%. This
decline was not unilateral, it was multilateral. For example, Bloomington had 1538% in the
original composition and in the expanded group that percentage declined to 8.5%. Due to the
uniform reduction, there has been no change in the relative representation of any public entity.
�
2
I do have some altemate proposals which address Mr. Richter's concerns and which would be
consistent with MASAC bylaws:
_ t[ _ �'_ !'ty :.n t �i
I recommend that term limit language be added to the bylaws that would limit any member to
serving a maximum of three, two-year consecutive terms. Communities with more than one
representa.tive should have staggered terms to allow for continuity. In addition, members
representing communities either ought to be residents of the community or have a professional
affiliation, such as an employee relationship with the government, in order to be a qualified
member.
u:. : : t 'u't
During the July 1 l, 1997 Executive Committee meeting, some comments were made to the effect
that MA.SAC was not accomplishing its noise abatement mission. In response to this comment, I
recommend a11 MASAC members receive a copy of an informational brochure listing the many
accomplishments of the Council. Moreover, in the past year the Council has forwarded to the
Commission numerous recommendations regarding Sta.ge III usage, noise abatement departure
profiles, ANOMS upgrades and related items, a11 of which either reduce noise impacts or assist
MASAC in making accurate evaluations of noise impacts.
. ,
; _y�--�-�- =-� ! � -� 1--� � % � ! � ' • ' t i
The main issue before the Executive Committee is a request to realign the membership
composition based upon noise impact to property parcels, a criteria in plain non-conformance
with the bylaws. To comply with the bylaws, let us consider whether representation is balanced
according to flight patterns.
A review of the present use of the runways at MSP shows that large numbers of aircraft utilize
the parallels during normal operations. Consequently, the communities off the ends of the
parallels receive more noise rmpact. A method of determining if the governmental units off the
pazallels are adequately represented is to add up the representatives allocated to the various
runway ends. When this is done, one sees that the MASAC membership has 58.82% of its
members from azeas impacted by parallel runway air traffic operations (including 1 from north
Richfield), and 41.17% of its members from azeas impacted by cross-wind runway traffic
(including 1 from south Richfield.) If one takes this more global view, which is to say that no
community has a monopoiy on noise impacts and that all communities share the impacts, the
concerns about adequate representation from impacted azeas evaporates - the plain fact is noise
impacts from MSP are regional, and the MASAC membership reflects the regional areas
impacted.
�:; �
1) I recommend the membership composition remain as it is presently.
2) I urge those members who are dissatisfied to bring�constructive suggestions to the
MASAC table that reduce noise impacts for a11 the affected areas.
3) The population, active interest, and flight pattem criteria stipulated in the bylaws should
be used if this matter is pursued by the Executive Committee.
4) I urge the committee to move to the full MASAC council an amendment to the bylaws
establishing term limits for the members.
5) MASAC should continue to explore methods to reduce aircraft noise at its source.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
,,,,� . �,,.��,
John K. Nelson
Senior Environmental Health Specialist
Environmental Services Division
Department of Community Development
�
C �- �
Metropolitan Aircraff Sound Abatement Council (MASAC�
604C 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 •(612) 726-9411
Chairman: Roberf P. Johnson
Past Chairs: Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Walter Rockenstein, II, 1982-1990
Jan Del Caizo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Oison, 1969-1979
Technical
Advisor: John Foggia
August 18, 1997
Mr. Pierson ``Sandy" Grieve
MAC Chairman
4900 IDS Center
80 South 8�' Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Chairman Grieve,
The last P&E meeting featured a statement by a former commissioner calling into question the goals and
purpose of MASAC. Rather than reply at the meedng, I have elected to address the commissioners as a
�'������ whole. �
In response to criticism of the time it takes to act on items such as New Noise Management Methodology
(NNMM) and Noise Abatement Departure Profiles (NADPs), I offer the following:
• MASAC is a deliberative public process
• Public. members have diverse individual agendae
• We are in a time of ever-changing and evolving technologies (ANOMS, GIS, etc.), which begs
the re-evaluaCion of previous work
e City representadves have multiple review opportunities for all recommendations at both the staff
and City Council level.
� Certain public members' "Nit-Picidng" continually wastes dme
� MASAC is an advisory body to the commission and has no dedicated support staff nor a dedicated
budget. It follows, therefore, that MASAC priorities are not always the same as the staff priorities.
`r Contrary to past practices, MASAC has had stated objectives during the last several years, and in
1997 the Operadons Committee has.mec each month. The Executive Committee has also been active.
(See attached list of objectives.)
i MASAC's 1997 objectives — NADP, NNMM and Mpls. Straight-out Departures — have all been acted
on. One last item is awaiting FAA approval and the Operations Committee has discussed the
Shoulder Hour Analysis and forwarded it to the full MASAC. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a record
of accomplishments that MASAC members fee! illustrates the real worth of our organization.
� �
� RECYCLED PAPEF
� Internal prablems within MASAC have been the result of poor attendance by some public and
industry members, plus the activities of certain members to press personal rather than MASAC goals.
�
The real, wthful problem some public members have with MASAC is none of the above. It is, plain and
simple, "the airport is still here"!!! The legislative decision to remain at MSP is a major prob(em for
some members. Therefore, nothing MASAC dces can possibly be right or O.K. �
We at MASAC are always available to discuss any and all items with the Commission at a time of your �
choosing.
Sincerely,
7"Z , 7 V1.,A-�'Yt--",J
R.P. John
�
Chairrnan,�'
cc: All MAC Commissioners
I I . � � / � �
'� Projected Date Accomplishing Party Topic/Ilequirements
1997
April 7, 1997 Operations Committee NADP Analysis Briefing (John Foggia)
10:00 AM � (Airport Operations #4)
Apri122, 1997 MASAC NADP Analysis Briefing (John Foggia)
7:30 PM
June 13, 1997 Operations ComFnittee Mpls. Straight-out Departure Analysis Outline
10:00 AM
June 24, 1997 MASAC NNMM Quarterly Reporting to Replace ADNE Briefing
7:30 PM (Airport Operations # 1)
July 11, 1997 Operations Committee Mpls. Straight-out Departure Analysis
10:00 AM Briefing/Implementation
( ) July 22, 1997 MASAC Mpls. Straight-out Departure Analysis
7:30 PM Briefing/Recommendation
August 15, 1997 Operations Committee Shoulder Hour Analysis Outline
10:00 AM (Airport Operations #2)
September 12, 1997 Operations Committee Shoulder Hour Analysis Briefing/Implementation
10:00 AM
September 23, 1997 MASAC Shoulder Hour Analysis
7:30 PM ' Briefing/Recommendation
October 17, 199� Operations Committee SID vs. GPS Departure Procedure
10:00 AM (Airport Operations #3)
January 16, 1998 Operations Committee 1998 MASAC Objectives
10:00 AM
( j
C�
MINU1'ES
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
� August 14, 1997
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission West Terminal Buiiding
Conference Room and called to order at 1:35 a.m.
The foilowring members were in attendance:
Mark Salmen, ChaiRnan - NWA
Bob Johnson = MBAA
John Nelson — Bloomington
Tom Hueg — St. Paul
Didc Keinz — MAC
Kevin,Batchelder - Mendota Heights
James Serrin -- Minneapolis
Adviso :
Traa Eridcson — MAC
John Foggia — MAC
John Aamot — FAA
AGEI�DA
NADP UPADTE
Vis.=
Jan Del Calzo
John Richter — Minneapolis
Joe Lee — Minneapolis
Steve Minn — Minneapolis
� ) Chairman Salmen �eported that the recommendation from MASAC regarding the Noise Abatement
Departure Profiles (NADP's) was unanimously app� oved at the P8�E Committee meeting in August and
would go to the full Commission on August 25 as a consent item. � He said if the Commission
approved the recommendation, the implementation schedule would be based .on the NOS charting
cycle. • �
MlNNEAPOtIS STRAIGHT-0UT DEPARTURE PROCEDURE UPDATE
Chairman Salmen gave an overview of the last Operations Meeting discussion.
John Aamot, FAA, said although an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be necessary, he felt the
procedure could be used when traffic and controller workload permitted•
Traci Ericicson, MAC, said that-an EA is required for any change in procedures below 3,000 feet. She
said in order to fir►d °� eneeate con' ours a differ�eere isf grea er� than'ta 1 5 dnlnun t differenceptan
HNTB would need to g
Environmental Impact Statement (EfS) would have to be completed.
There was a lengthy discussion rega�ding the parameters used to determine when an EA and/or an
EIS were required. John Foggia, MAC, and John Aamot, FAA, e�lained that any time there is a
change in a written tower procedure under 3,000 feet, an EA is required, even if the flight path in
question is currenUy being used. Jim Serrin, Minneapolis, questioned why, for instance, an EA or E1S
;
wasn't required for the increase in operations at the airport, which had lead to an increase in noise.
John Foggia, MAC, explained that the increase in ope�ations did not in and of itself trigger a change in
the written tower procedures. �
There was also a discussion about how the EA would be conducted and the possibility of the contours
snowing more than a 1.5 dnl unit increase. Jim Serrin, Minneapolis, was concemed about what criteria
would be used to generate the contours. John Foggia, MAC,� and John Aamot, FAA, said how the EA
is conducted depended on how the motion was worded. They suggested that the motion be expliciUy
re-worded in order to be sure the parameters of the EA were as loose as possible. Mr. Foggia said
that if the contours come back showing an increase of over 1.5 dnl units, the proposal (motion) wording
could be changed before it was submitted to the FAA.
The motion from the July 15, 1997 meeting is amended as follows:
JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND KEViN BATCHELDER, MENDOTA HEIGHTS,
SECONDED TO PROPOSE TO THE FAA THAT DEPARTURES OFF RUPIWAY 30R AND 30L
NORMALLY G1VEN A RUNWAY HEADI(VG 8E G(VEN A HEADING OTHER THAN RUNWAY
HEADING WHENEVER TRAFFIC �►ND CONTROLLER WORKLOAD PERMfT. THf VOTE WAS
UNANIMOUS. ilAOT10N CARRIED.
(Please note, Joe Lee, Minneapolis, made the inifial main motion, afthough he is not a member of tne
Operations Committee. Since there were iwo seconds to the motian, John Nelson's first second has
become the main motion.)
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if this motion should go to the full MASAC body for a vote. John
Foggia, MAC, said that since the contour anaiysis would come back to the Operations Committee
before an EA would be conducted it wasn't ne�;essary at this time. He said the fuil council could vote
on the EA being conducted after the contours were discussed at a future Operafions meeting. �
John Foggia, MAC, said he would speak with HNTB within the week to begin the process of contour
generation. After the contours were completed and approved by the Operations Committee, HNTB
would complete the EA. He v+ramed that the process could take 9 months to complete. John Nelson,
Bloomington, asked staff if they would have an update at the next MASAC meeting of how long HNTB
thought it would take to generate the contours. Traci Ericicson, MAC, said she would have an update.
SHOUL DER HOUR ANAL YSJS
John Foggia, MAC, recommended the committee members go ahead with a proposal to e�ctend the
nighttime hours to 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. without further analysis. He said since the Noise Mitigation
Committee had already recommended these hours and the Operations Committee had already studied
Shoulder Hours, MASAC should take the lead to push it through to the Commission. He noted that the
nighttime voluntary agreement would then be that the airlines would not schedule passenger flights
after 10:30 p.m. and wauld restrict nighttime flights to Stage III aircraft only.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the airlines would adhere to a voluntary agreement. John
Foggia, MAC, said that although it was voluntary, the informafion wouid be published for the
Commission through the Noise Management Methodology progress report. He said the nighttime
hours could be segregated in the report to track whether or not the new hours were having any affect.
John Foggia, MAC, said a letter could be sent to each airline notifying them of the new hours and what
C
__ _
was e�ected of them.
John Richter, Minneapolis, said he thought members of MASAC and possibiy legislative
rep�esentatives should meet with the airiines that fly during the shoulder hours regarding nighttime
hours and the nighttime voluntary agreement.
It was noted that no other group, at this point, was taking up the issue of shouider hours. John Foggia,
MAC, encouraged the group to proceed with the issue before another group was formed to study the
issue.
It was noted that most non-passenger cargo planes departed in the early moming hours and were not
generally a part of the shoulder hour departures. John Foggia, MAC, noted that although Sun Country
Airlines carried passengers, they are considered unscheduled. He said one way staff has tried to
restrict airiines at night from using Stage II aircraft was through lease restrictions.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked why MASAC couldn't recommend that the early hours be extended
to 7:00 a.m. He said MASAC should not be afraid to push the nighttime limits (especially the use of
Stage II aircraft) fior the purpose of noise abatement' He said MASAC could �start by recommending a
10:30 p.m. start time for the resficted hours and then follow up with a recommendation to push the
nighttime hours to 10:00 p.m. to 7:Q0 a.m. 'rf the new analysis allows.
John Richter, Minneapolis, asked if MASAC could be updated on which airlines were flying Stage II
aircraft after hours. Chairman Salmen asked staff to report back to the Operations Committee on this
infomnation.
JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND TOM HUEG, ST. PAUL, SECONDED TO
, PHOPOSE TO THE FULL aAASAC BODY THAT THE CURRENT RESTRICTED NIGHTTIME
�� ) HOURS BE EXTENDED FROM 10:30 P.M. TO 6:00 A.M. AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
� LEGISLATIVE APPOINTED NOISE MITIGATION COMMtTTEE AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO
UPDATE THE SHOULDER HOUR ANALYStS OF STAGE II A(dD STAGE III OPERATIONS. THE
VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. AAOTION CARRIED.
John Richter, Minneapolis, suggested tt�at the analysis be broken down into fifteen-minute intenials.
ANOMS UPDATE
John Foggia, MAC, said staff has had problems with reading the optical disks. Staff has decided to
obtain the direct cannect capability from HMMH in order to be able to get the data to Mansour Raad so
that he can begin the reprogramming for ANOMS. He said an ANOMS update would be given at the
next MASAC meeting.
The meeting was adjoumed at 2:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
TOPICS FOR THE SEPTEMBER 12,_1997 MEETING
New Shoulder Hour Analysis
Minneapolis Straight-Out Departure Update
NADP Update
NMM Update
C
�����"��A �.1'�1`� � �.�.�� ���������i"�!
�p�'+,S Sq�ryr Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
Fr t 9� 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
� z Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296
�t °
- a � t �+
N
� •.'.���� O �y�`
�' �.
r "f" GO
9� 4rRPOR�S
August 20, 1997
Kevin Batchelder
City Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1 101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights MN 55118
Dear Mr. Batchelder:
�\� ' � i f'`.
j"i . j ^ '*- .... '
i F.+',.1,�'.f,,,�,,,, j JG•;,f ��v: S! '�'�,�•--.��_�
t
j; t
i ' k� 'M.:. .:-:�.�� i � �
r' ;;s� ,�UG �,q ,3,•j �'
�
�fF �' Ji. ���/ •'1 � �
f ; u-��..,� �� � �
� � .>."'� ;,' �. �;
_ '' �--� t.=.�'
Enclosed for your review are two sample formats for showing the properties in Mendota
Heights impacted by a potential third parallel runway at MSP. The graphic shows the twa
categories of properties identified in the agreement: 1) those which would be brought into the
contours as a result of the third parallel runway, and 2) those within the contour who would
experience a 1.5 DNL increase due to operations on the third parallel runway.
Please review the attached and let me know which approach you prefer. If you ha��e
questions, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Nigel D. Finney
Deputy Executive Director
Planning and Environment
cc: Tom Anderson, MAC
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action emptoyer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE � CRYSTAL • FLYING CLOUD � LAKE EI.��fO • SAINT PAUL D04VNTOWN
�
C..
� �
.� ;� m � �
� � � � � �
� w �, � " 'i, �, � P' �
� g � � � � a � p �
�n � v� U � � > � �
00 .:�000ao
) `L�..�� �.�...�.�..���.�, I
� ��
`� r..
� `
�
\ �
,._
�
a �-.�'a
�
� � �,••��� ;� �..,r- - -- -
��
���
� '
��
� '.:
� .
I�
5 '
/� -�,-=�
'�' � �
!�_.._..._,/"����
r
��'' �, � ,� ,a � �
�� �� � � �
a
a� •
�
w '� .� � �,❑ � °�
b0 � �%j � D '� � c�j a�,y '�O
r� ��r o„ o'� an'� �a o» a
V� !-� U� V.� Q..`7 i% �:>
, 5`, , , ' 1 ' ,
��
� 0. N N d� V N�
•� � � �
x ��, ���,�
� �
Q � � �' � � a � � �
� � � N P d t� �
� � M p N N N Q r
h
W
2
Cr
C-
CON1'RACT PERTAINING TO LIl�IITS
ON CONSTRUCTION OF A
THIRD PARALLEL RUNWAY
I. Recitals.
1. The Minnesota Legislature,. at its 1996 session, has enacted Laws of Minnesota.,
Chapter 464, Art. 3, Sec. 10 (hereinafter "the Runway Statute'�, which amends
Minnesota. Statutes 1994, Sec. 473.608 to require the Metropolitan Airports Commission
(hereinafter "the Commission" or "MAC") to enter into certain contracts with "affected
cities."
2. The Runway Sta.tute defines "affected city" as being any city that would
experience an increase in the area located within the 60 Lrin noise contour as a result of
operations using a third parallel nuiway constructed at the Twin Cities International
Airport (hereinafter "the Airport"). .
3. The Commission has determined that the City of Mendota Heights (hereinafter
"the City") is an affected city within the meaning of the Runway Sta.tute.
4. The Commission and the City have met and negotiated in good faith concerni.ng
the terms and conditions of the contract required by the Runway Staiute, and have arrived
at an agreement (hereina$er "the Agreement") which both parties desire to set forth in
writing.
II. Defmitions.
1. The term "third parallel runwa}�' shall mean any runway used for the azrival or
departure of air tra.ffic at the Airport constructed to the north of and generally parallel to
the existing parallel runways known as 29L/11R and 29R/11L.
2. The term "construct" sha11 mean physical construction and actions preliminary to
construction, includi.ng land acquisition, inclusion of funds for construction in the capital
improvement program budget or solicitation of bids for performance of physical
construction �rovidec� that the term shall not include planning activity. The term
"construct" shall not include land acquisitions by the Commission which include as a
restrictive covenant in the deed of conveyance that the acquired land sha11 not be used for
runway purposes during the period for which this Agreement is effective, �rovided that
such restrictive covenant shall expressly run for the benefit of affected property owners
and the City.
3. The term "approval" shall mean a legally binding assent occurring through action
by which the city legally binds itself.
�,.
C
�
4. The term "affected property owner" means any owner of real property which
property is withi.n that part of the Ciiy which:
a) would be brought into the 60 Ldn noise contour as a result of operations
on the third parallel runway; or
b) is within the 60 Ldn contour as detemuned without the thi.rd parallel
runway and which would experience a 1.5 or greater Ldn increase as a result of
operations on a third pazallel runway.
The Commission and the City agree that a diagram which designates the area meeting
this criteria shall be developed by the Commission not later than n.inety days subsequent
to execution of this Agreement by the City, which diagram will be subject to the City's
review and approval.
III Terms
l. The term of this Agreement sha11 be from the date of approval by the City to
December 31, 2020, subject to the provisions of this paragraph. On January 1 of 2021,
January 1 of 2031 and January 1 of 2041, this agreement shall be automatically renewed
for an additional ten-year term unless both the City and the Commission agree, at any
time prior to the expiration of the previous term, that the agreement sha11 terminate
without such renewal. Commencing on January l, 2021, this Agreement and any
renewals thereof may be terminated by sta.tutory enactment which contains an express
finding by the Mi.nnesota Legislature that, in. its judgment taking into account the welfare
of the State of Minnesota, there is no prudent or feasible alternative to construction of a
third parallel runway.
2. During the period for which this Agreement is effective, the Commission
promises that it shall not, without the approval of the City, construct a t.�ird parallel
runway. The Commission promises that prior to December 31, 2020, it sha.11 not
affinnatively advocate construction of a third parallel runway, provided that nothing in
this Agreement shall prevent the Commission from responding to requests for
information and advice made by the legislative or executive branches of state
government, or their constituent parts or designees.
3. During the period for which this Agreement is effective, the City promises that it
shall take no action to oppose the planning and construction of a North South Runway, as
such runway is described in the Airport's 20101ong-tern comprehensive plan, the
implementation of which is authorized by Laws of Minnesota 1996, Ch. 464, Art. 3,
Subd. 24. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City agrees:
a) its approval of this Agreement constitutes a declaration of the City
endorsing the construction of the above-described North South Runway; and
b) it shall not institute, be a party to, financially contribute to or in any other
manner support any legislation or legal proceedings (whether judicial,
� administrative or other) which have as a goal or effect the delay or prevention of
construction of the above-described North South runway, including without
limitation, proceedings asserting rights under environmental laws or regulations.
4. It is intended by the Commission and the City that, during the period for which
this Agreement is effective, the affected property owners shall have third party
beneficiary rights to enforce this Agreement in the event that a state law changes,
supersedes or in�alidates this Agreement or if a state law authorizes or enables the
Commission to construct a third parallel runway without approval of the City. It is
further agreed that this right of enforcement sha11 include that right to seek specific
enforcement and injunctive relief. Said third party beneficiary rights shall cease upon the
expiration of this agreement or its temlination pursuant to paragraph III. l. of this
Agreement. '
5. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the parties hereto and shall
not be subject to any altera.tion, supplement or repeal except as agreed to in writing. This
Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their successors and assigns.
6. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of any other
affected city which, by formal action, approves its terms and notifies the Commission of
said approval, �rovided that such affected city gives such notice to the Commission on or
before July l, 199'7. Nothiiag in this Agreement sha11 prevent the Commission and
affected cities other than the City from reaching a separate agreement with sepazate .
terms.
Dated: December 23 , 1996
Dated: December � 3 �1996
METROPOLITAN AIltPORTS COMIVIISSION
�� � �
By: � -t, i : .r� ��; _-i� .�
�
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By; �-� �- �lt.." �-� �
Its Mayor
♦TC2: 201362 v06 12/12/96
.�..��.
January 21, 1997
Mr. Thomas Anderson, General Counsel
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Mr. Anderson:
�
� ity o�
�eights
� ; r:, _iE .
JAr� 3 � 1997
L :_ _ .. �}_`��'�.,J-�, =.��
On December 17, 1996, the City Council of Mendota Heights approved the Contract
Pertaining to the Limits on Construction of a Third Paraltel Runway. During the discussion
FtQ�$c��rg *�is �rpr�val, the �ity CeLn�i� expressed coneern a�a1t the possi5le
interpretation of several sections of the coniract. This letter is to serve as a statement of
mutua! understanding regarding these particular sectio�s and their interpretations.
First, the North South Runway is not defined in the Definitions section of the Agreement.
Section I11 - Terms, Paragraph 3 makes a reference to the North South Runway, as
described in the MAC's 2010 tong term comprehensive plan. It is underst4od that this
provision refers to the plan as referenced in the MAC/Metropolitan Council Report to the
[.egistature dated March 1996 regarding tt�e Dual Track Airport Planning Process. tSee
Page 5-2 and Figure 5-3.)
, Second, as described in Sectian I11 - Terms, Paragraph 4, the third party beneficiary rights
�_:� are effective during the period for which this Agreement is effective. This means that
through the year 2020, at the least, the third party beneficiary rights are in force and are
effective, no matter what the �egislature may o� may not do. Only after the year 2020
may the Legislature terminate the Agreement, as described in Section I11 - Terms,
Paragraph 1. With no action by the l.egislature, the third party beneficiary rights continue
during the period for which this Agreement is effective.
Las�fy, as stateci in the defiinition of �affected property owners", the diagram which
designates the area for affected property owners is subject to the City's review and
approval.
This (etter wili serve as documentation of our rnutual understanding of the above
described sections of the Contract Pertaining to the �imits on Construction of a Third
Parallel Runway.
CtTY OF MENDOTA HEiGHTS METROPOI,�N AIRPORTS COMMISS{ON
�._......,,��_ _ . �
�Cr�,�. ( w�'� I �c�,�.. �,t GL
Kevin Batchelder, City Administrator Thomas Anderson, General Counsel
( j
-
1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 (612) 452-1850 • FAX 452-$940
�
��� 1l�Ietro�rolita� Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
Date: August 14, 1997 �/ ��J� "���-f� p�[/j,
V � `Y
To: Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Area Communities�,,� � 1�9,
ti``b,,�i
Minneapolis, St. Paul, St. Louis Park, Edina, Richfield, Mendota, ��,,,y�� `
Lilydale, Mendota Heights, West St. Paul, Sunf sh Lake, Eagan -.,�
Bloomington, Burnsville, Inver Grove Heights.
From: Chauncey Case - Transporta.tion Planning (602-1724)
cc Tom Caswell, Carl Schenk, John Kari, Rick Gelbmann
Subject: MSP Noise Policy Area Map
In December 1996 the Metropolitan Council adopted a revised Aviation
Deveiopment Guide Chapter. A new Noise Policy Area for MSP International
airport was included in the Aviation Guide an.d aviation System Statements were
transmitted to the affected communifies. Attached for your use is a copy of the
Geographic Information System map depicting the MSP noise policy a.rea.
Additional copies of this map are available by calling me.
An explanaiion of the noise policy azea, and the associated aircraft noise contours,
can be found in the December, 1996 Aviation Guide Chapter starting on page 66.
Information on application of the noise palicy area can alsa be found in the
Aviation Guide in the section on Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aizcraft
Noise (see page 61).
The noise policy, area for MSP includes both the Corrective -and Preventive land
use compatibiiity measures. The noise policy contours for the existing runways
are the same as those used for the currently approved FAR Part-150 program.
The MSP noise policy area is an overlay zone thai should be included in the local
community comprehensive plan update for December 1998. Application of these
noise zones and associated land use compatibility guidelines should be reflected
in the community land use plan and in local codes and ordinances.
�,.
C
Minneapolis - Saint Paul International Airport ■ FAR Part 150 Studv
OPTION 1
� � "ORIGINAL" 1996 CONTOUR
(Submitted to the FAA in Pa�t I50 Update, March 1992)
1996 Ldn Contours
0 4 8 Thousand
Scale � Feet
'��,
�.:
t
Notes for Discussion of Communitv StabilitX
Communitv Stabilization Workinoq Group Meetinq
Auc�ust 28, 1997
Metropolitan Airports Commission
0
1. Stabilization of What?
Is the objective to maintain the current residential
population and housing stock exactiy like it is today?
If not, what "stability" is it that we are looking for?
Is it maintaining area real estate values at community-
wide values?
Is it more than this?
Answer to these questions will determine:.
a} What we study to de#ermine the extent of
"instability„ _
b) What programs are appropriate.
0
;;
�
��
2. How Do We Measure Stabilitv?
Reai estate values. - `�"�. r�-�
Rate of turnover in housing.
,
.�, . : .�_
,n�..�^�. __e �''�"�-.:^r-.�"!.-t.�� .
Percentage (Number) of substandard dweliing units.
Percentage owner occupied/renters. � ��� ��� � �- �w� '���" "�"�-�'� ,
Building permits for home improvement.
Unoccupied dwelling units. `J��^���� � ��'�'� ;� �,�' � r
� � � � �;
�,� ;�.
�� � Vacant industriai/comrraercial enterprises,. change in
_
business licenses.
Public investment in neighborhood �
facilities/infrastructure. :;"���.._ _ .- �, - - � � � � '�- _r �.. �� : �.� =)
. �
Extent of participation in Neighborhood Revitalization
Program (Minneapolis).
Changes in age structure of population or other socio-
economic characteristics.
Other?
� ._
, ,. .
2
2. How Do We Measure Stability?
Real estate values.
Rate of turnover in housing.
Percentage (Number) of substandard dwelling units.
Percentage owner occupied/renters.
Building permits for home improvement.
Unoccupied dwelling units.
��
Vacant industrial/commercial enterprises,. change in (�
business licenses.
Public investment in neighborhood -
faci I ities/i nfrastructu re.
Extent of participation in Neighborhood Revitalization
Program (Minneapolis).
Changes in age structure of population or other socio-
economic characteristics.
Other?
3. Status of Residential Real Estate Value Survev
The object of the survey is to defiermine whether there
has been any discernable reduction in market values
of single-family residential properties in the noise zone,
over a period of time, beginning approximately in 1980,
The properties selected for the survey lie both inside
and outside the 20�5 high forecast DN1. 60+ noise
contours.
Properties selected are comparable on such factors as
age, size of dwelling unit, size of lot.
Data is being collected and calculations are being
.. -
Actual sales
coilected.
prices of these properfiies are also being
i.�
4. Actions bv Local Government/Agencies to Promote ��
Stabiii�
Consider in context of all current and proposed airport
noise related programs.
Consider measures that are community-wide programs
and those that are available to individual homeowners.
Consider degree to which actions promote our
stabilization objective, on the one hand, and either
mitigate noise impacts or compensate individuai �
property owners for noise impacts on the other hand.
Preliminary list, to be re-examined when the "stability"
objective is clarified, shown on attached sheet.
4 �.
U O � ��, � � �n «S r-+ ..� O � , , ,
c� >
�
C ,U
C!1 Q � ..''"'y . bA c�'C . � � > > >
� r� �. E-� > > >
c�
�
�
�a�.H ��> > »>
�
�
tiA
A.� �
� �
O �
�� .N �
�
U �-.� � ,�, ctt
� � p � U bA
� �,�> �� a
o �
� � � Q r.�. ..fl . O
C � � � ,,�' R" � �
.� U 0 � � � � �
N q r�i C� s"' � i" ry '
.� � � � on
� �� '� o ��a
� E� ris U �'`� a' cn �
A � ° r�
' � � � i � � '.F R-� �
,'"�G' -F c� � �'�.' '_' O ' 0
ccf G �'' � � v�i ^" R3
� � � O � � �-�i . � .�
+�-+ � � ,� � 'Cf � `�.
� � y X v � � r� �
� � � � � {�i 0 rC c.�
� � a � �, � � � N
'U' '�} � � � ..., � � �
•,,_, U .., 0 C
� � � � � � •� � �
� ,� � �, � � � o w �;
: °� � � � � � ° 3 .c
0 o a�
��,� aUU��v�,�0
U
O
Q
H
�
U
�
F
�
a
�
�
�
z
C�
�
r j.
,
,.' !
�
�'�.; - .`
�.
r
` r ; �'. `
� ,'1_-1 _�/�-..''�-�;�
�; . �
�' ''�
; ..�� f�'
. Y .. . ` : � ., .. . :. ,_;
r` �.. ., .,, ...
F'
,• f �Y�
Y.-, .._ . . , .
� ���.' �.'. ,.".. �,: �. �.:..
� � � � /� � I
,. -
1 -
,.r,�.,,,, +��,��I
r - �`"�� ' _� j
..
�- ! ��F '
: .
-�.. .
_ , , ,�
�. _.�..� �
�.: �
, :
., ,
:;. i
,
. :
•
1."
: ' .. . . .-: 1': .. _. ....
LV
{ '- • , '
.. .. / �� t?� 1 UI
;� � . 1
C
� .�� � f: I /•
C
% ti
.r. .
= � �-� . � � � . .. ........ _ . . ...._.._._..
; . .'
� ; ', � � , . .��_�.a.
V,'• _�
�: -. ' �`� ��
I ;
� : f �R'.�Ti:frtil'�YII'�`t
.. � fr/ L�tfift�fi'��' �
'/�tf�tL
r � ;7 . ��� �'.""""' �!�%� ��r'
I A�
i• �� .��..�
r' �
rl. '
it. �...�- .. .
t • '`.�
i`
� -
h �. . - . . ?�,.. .
n .
t.�... �.� . .
� ,
f. . �
, .
r '
Y,
( , �
1
I
f.
�� �
..
G' ..=.,. :�� ; ;
.
� .: = ... . ; :� , . .. „� . _ ...._ , ... .'�_ . �. . .1. _ .
. . .... . - ' - . _..:. _ � �.i.� . . __.�" - - ,. ='�....
0
C
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Operations and Complaint Summary
July 1997
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use
04 N/A N/A N/A N/A
22 N/A N/A N/A N/A
11 N/A N/A N/A N/A
29 N/A N/A N/A N/A
MSP JulyFleet Mix Percentage
Stage Scheduled Scheduled ANOMS ANOMS
1996 1997 -- Count 1996 Count 1997
Stage 2 50.0% 42.0% 51.0% N/A
Stage 3 50.0% 58.0% 49.0% N/A
Airport July Complaint Summarx
Airport - - 1996 1997
MSP 2191 1426
Airlake 0 2 .
Anoka 4 0
Crystal 1 0
Flying Cloud 11 1
Lake Elmo 2 0
SL Paui 8 3
Misc. 0 6
TOTAL 2217 1438
Ju1y Average Dai�y Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page I
Metropolitan Airports Commission
i j
Minneapolis - Sta Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
July 1997
Complaint Summary by City
City Arrival Departure Totai Percentage
Apple Valley 0 3 3 0.2°%
Bloomington 4 15 19 1.3%
Burnsville 0 16 16 1.1%
Cottage Grove 1 1 2 0.1%
Eagan 20 145 165 11.8%
Eden Prairie 4. 7 11 0.8%
Edina 1 23 24 1.7%
Inver Grove Heights 13 225 238 17.0%
Mendota Heights 4 206 210 15.0%
Minneapolis 135 444 579 41.3%
Minnetonka 3 4 7 0.5%
Plymouth 1 1 2 0.1%
Prior Lake 0 1 1 0.1 °Io
Richfield 10 51 61 4.4%
Shoreview 0 1 1 0.1 °Io
St. Louis Park 8 9 17 1.2%
St Paul 14 12 26 1.9%
Sunfish Lake 2 18 20 1.4%
220 1182 1402 100%
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
Page 2 Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs
l
' )
' Metropolitan Airports Commission
Available Time for IZunway Use
Tower Log Reports - July 1997
All Hours
0%
30%
45%
�
13 °1
19
Nighttime Hours
0%
�
11
\
7%
�
5%
_ „ 22
�
Aviation Noise & 5atellite Programs
52%
64%
75%
80%
Page 3
�. .�
O O O O O O �
O v'1 O �n O �n
M N N -� ^
SZI�II�'Id1iiI0� ,�O 2I�gI�II11�i
�
E
�
�
0
�
�
N
a�
i�
�
�
�
N
�O
Z
C
O
c"�tS
.�
a
T
L:
C
�` t .� � ,�► � , � � �,:
�
A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 9, Number 14 August 18,1997
Newark Int'Z
COURT DElvIES CITY REQUEST TO REQUIRE
FAA TO REASSESS NOISE IlVIPACT OF TtfRN
On July 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied a petition by
the City of Elizabeth, NJ, to require the Federal Aviation Administration to
reassess the noise im,pact on the city of a change in take-off procedures put into
effect at Newark International Airport last year.
The court found no merit to the city's claim that the FAA acted arbitrarily by
approving a change in a departure turn based only on a computer model and
without the benefit of actual on-site noise testing as requested by the city.
`"This c�mplaint amounts to a disa�eement with the methodology employed by
the FAA, but the city has offered no evidence that the computer model used by the
agency is seriously flawed, that the data is skewed, or that the programming was
done improperly," the court said.
_ The caurt also found that the city could not support its claim that the FAA had
failed to abide by Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, which
requires federal agencies to particularly attend to the environmental impact of their
(.. ;-� decisions on low income and m.inority populations.
The city offered no evidence to show that the Executive Order was violated in
(Continued on p. I10)
Seattle-Tacoma Int't
CITY CAN'T BLOCK NEW RUNWAY, BUT CAN
ACT TO MITIGATE IlVIPACT OF CONSTRUCTION
A Seattle area �owth management boazd issued a ruling Aug. 13 which struck
parts of the City of Des Moines' comprehensive plan that would block the addition
of a third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, but upheld the city's
power to act to mitigate the impact of th� construction process.
$oth the Port of Seattle, wirich operates Sea-Tac, and the City of Des Moines
hailed the ruling as a victory.
The Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board held that Sea-
Tac was an "essential state public facility" and its expansion cannot be barred by a
local comprehensive plan. The board ordered the Ciry of Des Moines to rewrite
two portions of its comprehensive plan that conflict with the Port of Seattle's plan
to add the runway.
But the board also ruled that the city can protect itself from the impacts of the
$1.5 billion airport expansion project by regulating construction, which could
make the project much more costly.
The Port of Seattle, which had sued to force the city to rewrite 21 portions of its
� � comprehensive plan that the port felt could interfere with its airport expansion
- project, hailed the ruling as supporting the authority of regional planners to
(Continued on p. 112)
Copyright � 1997 by Airport Noise Report, Ashburn, Va. 22011
In This Issue...
Newark Int'Z ... Appeals
court denies petition by City
of Elizabeth, NJ, to make
FAA. reassess noise impact of
change in departure proce-
dure - p. 109
Sea-Tac ... Growth man-
agement boazd strikes parts
of city plan that would block
new runway, but upholds
city's power to mitigate
construction impact - p. 109
... Sen. Patty Murray (D-
WA), state legislators ask
FAA, Justice to determi.ne
whether rerouting aircraft
over minority community
violates civil rights - p. 111
Los Angeles Int'Z ...
Noise, air among Ciry of El
Segundo's top concems about
expansion of LAX - p. 112
I'art X50 Program ...
Community group criticizes
noise programs at Burbank,
Van Nuys airports - p. 113
Community Groups ...
Conference cail set in effort
to form world-wide coalition
of anti-noise groups - p. 114
Companies ... Dunholter
forms new acoustical consult-
ing firm - p. 115
Orlando Int'l ... Airlines
approve $1.2 billion expan-
sion of airport - p. 115
110 Airport Noise Report
.Newark, from p. l09
any way, the court said. Rather, the city's argument "seems
to be that while suburban areas, such as Scotch Plains,
Wes�eld, and Cranford, NJ, received portabie noise
moni[oring equipment, Elizabeth did not ... and that an
inference of discriminatory or unfair treatment by the FAA
is suggested."
But the court found no evidence in the record that the City
of Elizabeth was unfairly treated or that the FAA "acted
with bias to protect Staten Island residents at the expense of
less advantaaed Elizabeth residents."
Having lost its lawsuit, city o�cials now plans to partici-
pate in discussions next month with FAA o�cials planned
by Reps. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Bob Franks (R-NJ)
that will attempt to find a regional solution to the noise
problems that have plagued northern New Jersey since the
FAA restructured air routes in the area a decade aao.
Review of SID Sought
The City of Elizabeth, which lies directly south of Newark
International Airport, had asked the court to review an FAA
order prescribing a Standard Instrument Departure proce-
dure for the airport. Since the 1960's, aircraft taking off
from Newark's two north-south runways, 22L and 22R,
have been required to avoid flying over the City of Eliza-
beth by making an immediate left turn to a heading of 190
degrees. Ttus raute directed aircraft over a strip of industrial
land between the city and the A.rthur Kill waterway, and
then over Staten Island, NY.
In an effort to reduce the noise impact on Staten Island,
the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey initiated a
second turn to the right to a heading of 220 degrees at 3.0
nautical miles from the airport. This turn, however, had the
unintended effect of sending aircraft over residential azeas
of Staten Island. To mitigate this noise unpact, the FAA
conducted noise measurements from May to September
1993 using a 2.0 nautical mile turn, as opposed to a 3.0
nautical mile turn. The FAA concluded that this turn would
be feasible but the City of Elizabeth protested, asserting that
the 2.0 turn was an"environmental disaster" for its resi-
dents.
The Port Authority prepared an Environmental Assess-
ment (EA) for a permanent change in the departure proce-
dure which considered turns at 2.0, 23. 2.5, and 3.0 nautical
miles, as well as a straight out departure. The preferred
alternative was a turn at 2.3 nautical miles.
The Port Authority's EA used the DNL noise metric and
considered impact betow 65 dB DNL compatible with all
land uses. The Port Authority also used the FAA's Inte-
grated Noise Model to produce noise contour maps of each
alternative route and correlated those maps with regional
census date to determine the number of people impacted by
the proposed flight plans.
The Port Authoriry deternuned that the 23 nautical mile
turn would resuit in [he greatest overall decrease in the
number of residents, both in New Jersey and on Staten
Island, exposed to hiah levels of aircraft noise. It found that
the 23 nautical mile turn would provide a total reduction in
noise exposure while producing no significant noise
increases in che residential areas of Elizabeth; whereas the
2.0 nautical mile turn, tested in 1993, would result in
substantial increases in noise impact for the city.
The Environmental Assessment was submitted by to the
FA.A with a request to adopt the 23 nautical mile turn. The
FAA aa eed with the Port Authority's recommendation,
approved the change in departure procedure, and issued a
Record of Decision concludin� that the requested change
would have no significant environmental effects. The FAA
also found that the 1993 test data had been used for the
computer model and that a new test would provide no
additional data.
FAA Decision Challenged
The City of Elizabeth challenged that decision, contendina
that the agency's decision is arbitrary and capricious
because no actual on-site noise assessment tests of the 2.3
nautical mile turn were every done by the'Port Authority
and because the computer-generated model used by the
FAA is untested and contradicted by actual complaints by
residents.
The city also asserted that the FAA did not take into
account the fact that mainly goor and minority popuIations
in the Elizabethport section of the city would be adversely
affected by the 2.3 mile turn. They city asked the court to
require the Port Authority and the FAA to conduct formal
on-site testing. '
Elizabeth officials contended that because there would be
a serious noise impact as a result of a turn at 2.0 nauticai
miles, changed the turn to only 23 nautical miles could
never make the difference in noise impact that the computer
model predicted.
But the court found that the city offered no expert testi-
mony or affidavits to support this conclusion and conducted
no noise test on its own. It.only supplied affidavits from
residents and the mayor claiming increased noise complaints
as evidence that the 2.3 mile turn has not altered the noise
impact on the ground. Based on these affidavits, the city
asked the court to hold that the FAA's reliance on its
computer model fails the "hard look" test that agency's are
required to make in doing environmental assessments.
The court disagreed, nodng that the EA relies on noise
measurement methodology that has been used for many
years by the FAA, has been approved by the Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise, and has been endorsed by
other courts. `"The only question is whether the computer
simulation that the Port Authority utilized is reliable, and
the city offers no reason to doubt it e�cacy," the court said.
William Hotzapfel, Elizabeth city attorney, told the
Elizabeth Horrte News & Tribune that the city lost the case
because it could not afford to hire the expensive experts
needed to come up with strong scientific evidence to
Auport Noise Report
August 18,1997
challenge the FAA's experts.
"You need expert reports or opinions, and [the FE1A] has
ail the big guns," he told the paper.0
( �
� Seattle-Tacoma Int'Z
FLIGHT PATH CHA.NGES
MAY VIOLATE CNIL RIGHTS
By Charles F. Price — A.ircraft noise imposed on residents
of a low-income and minority Seattle neighborhood may
constitute a violation of their civil rights, according to
complaints laid before the Federal Aviation Administration
and the Department of Justice by a U.S. senator, two state
legislators, and a citizen activist.
The community in question is located in southeast Seattle.
Some residents there charge that the Port of Seattle, which
operates Seatde-Tacoma International Airport, has changed
fli?ht paths without notice to the community in order to
route planes away from more affluent neighborhoods and
over what is the largest low-income and minority area in the
State of Washington.
One official called the policy "the route of least resis-
tance," and a lacal resident who contends it constitutes a
violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 recendy
asked the Justice Depamnent to intervene. Justice has
declined to act, however, referring the complaint to FAA.
Responding to constituent complaints, Sen. Patty Murray
(D-WA) wrote on July 17 to the Northwest Mountain
Region of FAA expressing concern "about the lack of action
taken by the FAA to address the specified complaints of the
residents of the southeast Seattle and that the people of this
community have not had a voice regazding a shift in air
flight patterns."
"Furthermore," the senator wrote, "residents of southeast
Seattle have observed planes flying on future proposed
flight tracks, and the nighttime flight routes that are sup-
posed to be used to mitigate the noise at night have been
vastly under-utilized."
FAA's Northwest Region has responded to Murray's letter
but would not provide its response to ANR without a
Freedom of Information Act request. ANR is seeking to
obtain the response through Sen. Murray's o�ce, but as of
press time had not yet received it. '-
Subsequent to Sen. Murray's intercession, two Washin�
ton State legislators wrote to thank her for taking up a cause
which is of o eat importance to their constituents in south-
east Seattle. They were State Sen. Adam Kline and State
Rep. Kip Tokuda, both of the 37th Legislative District.
Kline said complains have been increasing in the affected
neighborhood, "and many have come from responsible
citizens who are not by nature complainers." Pointing out
that Federal civil rights statutes have been "brought to bear"
on highway and industry projects pianned for low-income
and minority areas, Kline said litigation might be warranted.
But, he continues, "I urge you to help our quarter of the city
111
in a way that avoids the need for litigation:'
Tokuda wrote that the alleged violations of the Civil
Rights Act stemmed from the failure of FAA and the Port of
Seattle to involve the community in the decisions to expand
Sea-Tac and to develop new flight paths durina the environ-
mental review process. "In addidon," he said, "no noise
mitigation was offered or proposed to address the negative
impacu to the c�mmunity."
Letter to Justice
In a letter of July 15 to Attorney General Janet Reno,
southeast Seattle activist Ray Akers elaborated on the points
Tokuda raised. Prior to receivin� FAA approval for the Sea-
Tac expansion, he wrote, "my community began experienc-
ing devastating quality of life impacts as a result of altered
flight corridors."
"For nearly three years," Akers went on, "my community
has been subjected to chane ng flight patterns." The Port of
Seatde, he chazged, "began altering flight paths during the
Environmental Impact 5tudy process and never involved my
community in any way." He said that once-quiet skies are
now filled with traffic 24 hours a day.
Akers contended that nighttime air operations have
increased more than 40 percent in a year, that flight tracks
had been shifted to the east by at least three degrees, that an
airport navigation device has been adjusted to create new
arrival corridors through the eastern half of the city, that the
changes were implemented without an EIS, and that no
mitigarion measures such as sound insulation, buy-outs or
more beneficial alterations in flight paths have been offered
to affected residents.
Responding by letter of July 23, the Justice Deparnnent
notified Akers that the FAA's Office of Civii Rights "is
responsible for investigating complaints against airport
authorities," and said Akers' complaint has been referred
there for action.
Akers then wrote on Aug. 1 to Fanny Rivera, director of
the FAA Civil Rights office, reiterating his contention that
Sea-Tac and FAA are violating the civil rights of the people
of southeast Seattle and expressing strong doubt that FAA.
could police itself effectively. The community, he said,
"now bears a disproportionately higher burden of health,
envimnmental, and economic impacts as a direct result of
actions by the Port of Seattle and the FAA."
"I am less than optimistic," Akers wrote, "that an internal
investigation by your office will provide relief to my
community or validate the real-life experience of inembers
of my community. The purpose of my letter is to convey to
you the sense of outrage many here feel at the deliberate and
ongoing ruination of the quality of life here in southeast
Seatde at the hands of the FAA, the only federal agency
empowered to proteci us! The FAA's support and participa-
tion in the alteration of flight tracks over southeast Seattle is
both shameful and illegal."
As of press time Akers had received no response to the
Rivera lettez.�
Airpoct Noise Report
112 Airport Noise Report
Sea-Tac, from p. I09
override the objections of local governments. A spokesman
for the port said the board's decision precludes the city from
promulgating policies that interfere with a re�ional decision
to expand the capacity of Sea-Tac. �
However, Robert Orlander, city manger of Des Moines,
said the city retains its right to regulate what goes on within
it boundaries. The ruling leaves intact a range of provisions
under which the city could require changes to mitigate the
project's impact, Orlander told the Des Moines News. He
said, however, that the city will not go out of its way to
make the new runway project too expensive.
The two provisions of the city's comprehensive that must
be rewritten are one that states that city leaders will help
implement regional growth decisions only if they do not
negatively affect city residents and business owners. The
second provision states that the city will oppose any new
facilities associated with Sea-Tac that "increase adverse
impacts to the city: '
But the growth management boazd let stand other strate-
gies in the Des Moines' plan that allow the ci .ty to regulate
truck transport through the city and how fill dirt needed for
the runway construction project will be mined.
The new runway will be located within the City of
SeaTac, which is close to Des Moines. However some of the
fill dirt need for the project wiIl be mined in Des Moines.
The Port of Seattle had argued that Des Moines' compre-
hensive plan violated the Washington Growth Management
Act which requires locai governments to work together in
deciding where to site essential public facilities, such as
airports. In July 1996, the Puget Sound Regional Council
approved the addition of a third runway at Sea-Tac.
One member of the growth management board members
asserted in his ruling that the City of Des Moines has an
obligation to make its land use plans consistent with
regional plans. But, the other two boazd members did not
join in that statement, leaving it little legal wei;ht.�
Los Angeles Int'1
i� � ' /
• : �' �'• � � • /
By Charles F. Price — Attorneys for the City of El
Segundo, CA, have gone on record with a long list of the
city's concerns about the potential.impacts of proposals to
expand Los Angeles Internadonal Airport, with aircraft
noise leading the list.
The City of El Segundo, its residents, and its businesses
are already heavily impacted by LAX operations, attorneys
E. Clement Shute, Jr. and Richard S. Tayior of the San
Francisco law firm Shute, Mihaly & Weinberaer, which
represents the city, stated in a July 30 letter to the Los
Angeles Department of Airports (DOA) and the Federal
Aviation Administration. In view of the "tremendous scope"
of expansion contemplated by any of the four development
alternatives proposed, EI Segundo would be subject to
"much more severe impacts on ail aspects of city life," the
attorneys asserted.
T'heir comments were filed to document EI Segundo's
response to an o�cial notice by the DOA and FAA that the
expansion proQosals will undergo environmental study and
project design. The letter followed up testimony the city
�ave at a scoping meeting on July 16.
Shute and Taylor argued that the FAA/DOA initial study
checklist "does not identify many of the issues of ;reatest
concern to the people most severely afFected by the airport
and the proposed expansion." They said that, in addition to
the matters FAA and DOA have said they intend to study,
others should be considered, such as the exposure to noise
of sensitive receptors, general noise impacts citywide, air
quality effects, public safety concerns, and implications for
vehicular u�c.
With regard to sensitive receptors, Shute and Taylor
argued that more than a dozen schools and parks in El
Segundo are subject to overflights and to "the adverse
effects of noise and air pollution" which they contend
impair children's ability to learn. Accordingly, the attorneys
said, the combination Environmental Impact Report/
Environmental Impact Study (IIR/EIS), which will satisfy
both state and federal requirements, also must consider the
adverse effects on the city's significant populadon of older
residents.
The city is "severely impacted" by aircraft noise from
current LAX operations, Shute and Taylor wrote, and El
Segundo's experience has been "that long term and enforce-
able provisions to reduce noise impacts have beea elusive."
The prospect of substantial additional aircraft noise, they
said, "is disheartenina " Therefore, "the city requests that
the draft EIR/EIS adopt and apply significant criteria which
aze more in keeping with the impacts of aircraft noise as it is
experienced by people."
Noting that the nsual noise impact criteria used in Califor-
nia (Community Noise Equivalent Level or CNEL) "is
based on average noise which is experienced by no one," the
attorneys asked that single event noise analysis be "the
primary significance criterion:'
"Moreover," they wrote, "there is more and more scien-
tific information which indicates that prolonged exposure to
aircraft noise can have adverse human health consequences.
This should also be part of the significance standazd. The
importance of utilizina appropriate significance standards is
found in the legal requirement of identifying alternatives
and mitigadon measures which would lesson the anticipated
impacu:' The EIR/EIS, said Shute and Taylor, should
include "all the alternatives and mitigation measures
available to reduce noise impacts, including operational
modifications such as eliminating offsets, modifyina the
published missed appmach procedure, and requiring straight
out departures and power cut-backs."
Airport Noise RepoR
�
I )
August 18,1997
Air Quality
In the area of air quality, the EI Segundo lawyers said the
EIR/EIS must evaluate the effect of LAX expansion on the
ability of the Los Angeles region to comply with federal air
quality mandates, must determine the project's emissions of
hazardous air pollutants and tailor the alternatives to
"substantially reduce" them, and must evaluate the impacts
of a withdrawal of federal funds should emissions not be
reduced.
Public safety considerations were raised as well. Noting
that the FAA/DOA initial study checklist did not address the
risk to public safety, Shute and Taylor wrote that "the
subject of aircraft safety must be the subject of substantial
analysis together with proposed alternatives and mitigation
measures." Safety hazards, they said, "can only be increased
by the substantial increases in flights called for in each of
the development proposals."
The EI Segundo comments also stressed the likely effects
of the project on surface tr�c, saying the EIR/EIS must
"explain how LAX and the DOA will finance the traffic
improvements in El Segundo and elsewhere necessary to
accommodate the increased tr�c volumes attributable to
the airport "
Shute and Taylor recited a number of instances which they
said showed DOA's disinterest in responding to El
Segundo's concerns about noise and other impacts of I.AX
operations. Among acts they labeled as "unfulfilled prom-
ises" was a contendon that LAX took in more than $160
million in Passenger Facility Charges meant to partly fund a
residential sound insulation program, and then "abrupdy
canceled" both the program and the PFC collection.
Also, they wrote, DOA "has substantially increased" the
severe late nighdeazly morning noise impact on EI Segundo
by disregarding the Over-Ocean Operadons procedure
approved by the Board of Airport Commissioners and
allowing over 95 percent of the airport's departures to be
staged at the south complex of the airport, nearest the city.
"This has caused siress, discomfort, and health risks to the
citizens of El Segundo between midnight and 6:30 a.m.,"
the attorneys charged.
LAX, they wrote, "has been generally unresponsive to the
concerns expressed by EI Segundo and its residents:' In the
past three years, they claimed, noise.complaints have risen
by 30 percent but DOA has yet to offer "any meaningful
response." Furthermore, "DOA modified the one residential
sound insulation program in which all jurisdictions were
participating to mandate easements in exchange for sound-
proofing funds. This is in direct conflict with a city resolu-
tion stating that the city "will not participate in a pro�ram
that limits the legal rights of its residents," they said.
Shute and Taylor also charged DOA with "illegal opera-
tions" at LAX, saying the Department "has not complied
with state law and court orders requiring it to reasonably
reduce the airport's noise impact areas." Instead, they
contended, over the past three yeazs the amount of land
subject to "legally unacceptable levels of airport noise" has
113
increased by almost 20 percent rather than decreased, the
number of pecsons impacted has risen by almost 20,000, and
the number of dwellings impacted has climbed by nearly
5,000. Finally, they wrote, DOA "has failed to provide
timely reports on LAX's noise impacts. The DOA has not
submitted 40 percent of the quarterly reports required since
December 1993. Of the reports submitted only one was
submitted on time."
The El Segundo comments will be considered by DOA
and FAA in the design of the environmental impact and
project smdies.�
Van Nuys
GROUP CRITICIZES PART 150s
FOR BURBANK , VAN r�UYS
By Charles F. Price — The president of a citizens' anti-
noise organization in Southern California has fired two
broadsides of criticism at the airports whose operations
affect his community.
One blast was at the Los Angeles Department of Airports
(DOA) for its alleged failure to adequately carry out a
funded Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility study at Van
Nuys Airport. The othez was aimed at the Burbank-Glen-
dale-Pasadena Airport for not sufficiendy broadening the
membership of its Part 150 Study Advisory Committee
(SAC).
Gerald A. Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino,
wrote July 1 to David Kessler of the Western Reb onal
office of the Federal Aviation Administration charging "a
disgraceful waste of $275,000 of public funds" earmarked
for the Van Nuys Part 150 study. This Augnst, Silver wrote,
"will mazk the lOth year anniversary since the Grant
Agreement was signed, and the FAA and the public have
received absolutely notlring in return." DOA, he said, has
failed to prepaze an acceptable Noise Exposure Map and
Noise Compatibility Program.
Silver pointed out that the Part 150 study launched in 1987
resulted in a Noise Exposure Map which FAA did not
approve in 1993 because additional information was needed.
"Nothing (from DOA) has been forthcoming" since then,
Silver wrote. "DOA seeks only to blame the FAA for its
inaciion," he said. Silver asserted that the FAA has allowed
the �ant money to be wasted and has not demanded an
accounting from DOA.
The charge against the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena
Airport was that, in picking members of the advisory
committee for a$300,000`Part 150 Study update, the
airport's consultant did not include representatives of
communities most directly affected by airport operadons. "It
soon became clear," Silver wrote on Aug. 4 to Sidney Allen,
Study Committee coordinator, "that the SAC was an
unbalanced advisory committee, weighted heavily in favor
of the aviation industry:"
In the Van Nuys case, Silver wrote that DOA "has not
Airport Noise Report
114 Airport Noise Report
ac[ed in good faith in accepting the FAA's $215,000, has
failed to carry out their Grant Agreement responsibility in a
timely manner, has failed to fully and properly involve the
public in the process, and has faiied to follow FAA Advi-
sory Circulars and guidelines." This "dismal record," he
said, "is nothing less than shocking." He called on FAA to
require the return of the federal funds, to fully investigate
the matter, and to demand accountability in ail future
dealings with the department.
With regard to the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport
(BGPA) matter, Silver charged that the SAC included "only
a couple of homeowner representatives from communities
most affected by BGPA noise, and there are no representa-
tives from key elected o�cials. It was most unfortunate that
community groups in Studio City, Sherman Oaks, Valley
Village, Encino, Van Nuys, and in the Santa Monica
mountains were not informed of the SAC, nor given an
opportunity to participate," he said.
In a conversation with ANR, Silver implied that the
BGPA consultant, Coffman Associates, had become too
prominent in the process and had virtually taken the place of
airport decision-makers whom the SAC was intended to
advise.
The purpose of his letter, Silver wrote, was to ask BGPA
and its consultant to "reassess the situation and immediatel3�
expand the SAC to include affected resident associations ...
We also ask that you include participation from additional
affected Los Angeles City Council districts that ace not now
represented on the panel. You should also include congres-
sionai representatives as well as State Senate and Assembly
districts: '
Silver listed a number of other actions he said BGPA
should take in order to increase community involvement,
including the scheduling of 5AC meetings during the
evenino hours, more timely notification of ineetin�s,
establishing public comment periods for important agenda
items, and a public display of innportant documents.
As of press time, Silver had received no official response
from either FAA or BGPA. BGPA Study Coordinator Allen
told ANR that Coffman Associates would answer Silver's
letter soon. Coffrnan Associate Mark Johnson confirmed by
telephone that an answer would be sent by Au�. 18 or 19.
FAA's Kessler was not available to say�whether FAA
would comment on Silver's characterization of the Van
Nuys Part 150. But Maurice Laham of the DOA environ-
mental staff pointed out to ANR chat "FAA didn't disap-
prove the [noise exposure map], they just didn't approve it,"
mainly because of uaffic projections showing more traffic
and larger contours than FAA believed could be justified.
The Iarger projections were revisions of DOA numbers and
were lazgely inspired by members of a review committee.
Laham called the FAA money "well spent," saying DOA
had come up with 25 Part 150 recommendations and
implemented "about 20." "We're already doin� what we
said we'd do," he said, and went on to explain that three
noise-related measures are now being negotiated with FAA
— adding an hour to the niahttime curfew, implementing a
non-addition rule, and prohibiting helicopter flights between
10 p.m. and 7 a.m. — in an effort to convince FAA that the
proposed measures are not restrictions that woutd require a
Part 161 cost/benefit smdy.
"Gerald has some points in his favor, though," Laham
remarked. "It's taken us some time to get things done, and
it's his job to hold our feet to the fire."0
Community Groups
� • •
� �' ' ' ,�' �, � � '�'
Representatives of approximately 15 large U.S. commu-
nity anti-noise groups will talk via conference cal�l on Aug.
23 to determine how to form a world-w.ide coali�ion of
grass-rnots o oups concerned about airport noise and other
forms of airport gollution and safety.
The coalition, an idea being actively pursued for the past
year, will represent well over a million people all over the
world, said Jack Saporito of the Alliance of Residents
Concerning O'Haze, Inc. (AReCO) one of the main propo-.
nents of the effort.
The budding coalition, as yet unnamed, already has the
endorsement of the American Lung Association, the
American Cancer Society, the Siema Club, the Natural
Resources Defense Council, the League for the Hazd of
Hearing, and� other groups; he said:
Saporito said he has the names of over 800 community
groups in the United States alone that were formed over
concerns for airQort noise and other airport environmental
issues. Asked how he is finding these groups, Saporito said
they are finding him through the World �de Web and
newspaper stories.
"All around the world we aze all experiencing the same
run-azound �e same useless Federal �Aviation Administra-
tion and Commerce Commission backed mitigarion pro-
grams, the same old underestimated Environmental Impact
Statement process," declared a press release announcing the
Aug. 23 conference call. "Air transport and government
fixes pertaining to air, water, noise, a ound pollution,
properry losses, safety cancems, and citizen civil and
constitutional rights haven't worked. The aviation industry
has had a free ride from the president, legislators, and other
world leaders for far too long," the press release said.
It noted that the coalition is being formed to "link hun-
dreds of other organizadons and millions of citizens world-
wide, to protest, lobby, work to educate others about airport
expansion plans, human health and natural environmental
damage, the taking of our propezcies and loss of our quality
of life."
It is unciear at this point whether the� coalition could prove
to be a potent force in airport environmental matters.
Following passage of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act in
1990 several anti-noise groups from azound the country
formed an organization called the National Airport Watch
qirport Noise Report
�
��
�� �
August 18, 1997 115
Group, but it never developed much beyond a mailing list.
However, with tremendous growth in airport operations
expected in the next few decades, with airports becoming
more visible polluters as other industries clean up, and with
the Airport Noise and Capacity Act tyin� the hands of
airports to limit aircraft operations, conditions may be ripe
now for the development of a more successful coalition.
Activists expected to participate in the Aug. 23 conference
call represent a ass-roots environmental a oups in Seattle,
Los Angeles, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Columbus, OH,
Chicago, New York City, New Jersey, Denver, Orange
County, CA, Baltimore, San Jose, Washington, DC, and
Atlanta.
Anti-noise a oups in Australia, Britain, and Europe have
expressed interest in joining the coalition but will not
par[icipate in the conference call, Saporito said.
Quiet Communities Act
Park Ridge, IL, located near Chicago O'Hare International
Airport, became the first city to pass an AReCO-sponsored
resolution to urge all members of the Illinois Delegation to
co-sponsor legislation in Congress to reaathorize funding
for the Environmental Protection Agency's noise office.
The Quiet Communities Act of 1997 was introduced in the
Senate by Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-N� and in the House by
Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY). The legislation wonld require the
EPA to coordinate all federal noise abatement activities,
update or develop new noise standards, provide technical
assistance to local communities, and promote reseazch and
education on the impacts of noise pollution, includingbut
not limited to aircraft noise.
Saporito said the AReCO is introducing its resolution
seeking support for the legislation to airport/environmental
health organizations and communities nationwide. He said
the resolution is part of an AReCO campaign to lower the
6� dB DNL threshold of compadble residential use reco;-
nized by the FAA to the SS dB DNL threshold recom-
mended by the EPA in the 1970s.
Consulting
DUNHOLTEI2 FORMS
NEW CONSULTING COMPANY
Paul Dunholter, formeriy a partner in the consulting and
engineering firm Mestre Greve and Asssoc., announced the
formation of his own company, $CS International, which
will provide a complete package of products and services
for designing and managing noise abatement programs and
improving ways in which the results of these pr b�rams can
be communicated to the general public.
Formed to provide a single source for the assessment,
analysis, management, and monitoring of noise, BCS will
use BridgeNet software which Dunholter developed while at
Mestre Greve to more easily communicate noise data to [he
public.
"In an effort to improve community relations, airports and
industries have been working for years on noise abatement
issues," Dunholter said in a press release. "An important
aspect of improving relations is �etting the community to
understand and posidvely respond to these efforts. Part of
[he problem is the di�culty airpoRs have in presenting
complex technical data in easy to understand terms."
BridgeNet, he said, is the firsi software to provide airports
with a method by which they can communicate the efforts
and achievements of noise abatement programs directly to
the general public in concise, fully documented reports
together with associated text, data, and �raphics.
"Providing information that addresses the public's
concerns in a format that ailows for rapid understanding will
help airports to better communicate with residents, thus
enhancing community relatians," Dunholter said.
The BCS product division will service, maintain, and
market internationally the BridgeNet software. Leigh
Hughes, vice president of BCS, will oversee the division.
Dunholter will head the BCS aviation division, which will
provide airports, community planning commissions, and
others with consultino services to assess the noise impact
from aircraft operations. 'The division also will develop,
monitor, and manage noise abatement programs.
Ted Lindbera will serve as manager of the BCS building
acoustics division, which will provide the building industry
with noise and land use evaivation services so that builders
can develop noise controlled designs that reduce the sound
from sources such as airports, railroads, and highway traf&c.
The division also will analyze interior architectural acoustic
design.
For further informarion on the new company, contact BCS
International, 3151 Airway Ave, Suite P1, Costa Mesa, CA
92626; tel: (714) 540-3120; fax: (714) 540-3156; E-mail:
Sales@airportneiwork.com; Web Site:
www.airportnetwork.com.0
Orlando Int'I
.. � • , ,•• �
:1 i �'. �
Carriers operadng at Orlando International Airport have
approved an additional $965 million expansion program that
will allow the airport to keep pace with airline passenger
b owth in Central Florida, the airport announced Aug. 14.
The pmject wiil add a fourth sateilite airside ternunal to
the current north terminal compiex, c�nstruct a new air
tr�c control tower, and begin work on a new south
terminal complex.
This program follows the approval of a�240 million near-
term construction project that wiil nearly double the number
of public parking spaces available, improve tr�c circula-
tion for b ound transportation providers and private ve-
hicles, and provide group check-in facilities.
Airport Noise Report
116 Airport Noise Report
• ' '1, �'" •
. � �,� ��. • �
Mark Atwood, Fsq.
Galland, Kharasch, Morse & Garfinkle
Washington, D.C.
Lee L. Blackman, Esq.
McDermott, Will & Emery
Los Angeles, Calif.
Dr. Clifford R. Bragdon, AICP
Dean, School of Aviaaon & Transportarion Dowting
College
Eliot Cutler, Esq.
Cuder & Stanfieid
Washington. D.C.
J. Spencer Dickerson
Senior Vice President
American Association of Airport Executives
Edwazd J. DiPolvere
Administxator, Nationa! Association of Noise
Conmol Officials
Richazd G. "Dick" Dyer
Airport Environmental Specialist, Division of
Aemnautics, Caiif. Dept. of Transportatioa
E. Tazewell Ellett, Esq.
Hogan & Haztson
Washington, D.C.
Julie H. Ellis, Esq.
Managing Direccor
Federal Expmss Corpor.uion
Angel M. Gazcia
CaChairman
Citizens Against Newark Noise
E.H. "Mce" Haupt
Manager, Airport and Environmental Services,
Nadonal Business Aircraft Association
Robert P. Siiverberg, Esq.
Bagileo..Silverbcrg & Goldman
Washingtoa, D.C.
Joanne W. Young, Esq. -
Baker & Hosteder LLP
Washington, D.C.
"This expansion progrann is a major step forward for Orlando and the
Central Florida region," said Bob Hattaway, chairman of the Greater
Orlando Aviaaon Authority "We will now be able to advance our plans to
consuvct the final satellite airside terminal in the existing terminal
complex, and enter the first phase of a new and lazger terminal complex
in the south."
"The approval by the airlines is a joint effort because the projects are
demand-based with appropriate safeguards to ensure that facilities will be
provided in a phased way as passenger demands continue to develop,"
Hattaway said. The airport's signatory airlines — Air Tran Airways,
American Airlines, American Trans Air, Comair, Continental, Delta A.ir
Lines, Northwest Airlines, Southwest Airlines, TWA, United, and US
Airways — all have lon;-term leases and gave the necessary approval
because they ab ee that the expansion program was needed to meet the
growing demands of travelers on Orlanda
Orlando Internationa] was the fastest growing major airport in the
world, according to the Airports Council International 1996 passenger
traffic statistics, the airport said. Orlando International's b owth rate of
13.9 percent was the highest of any of the top 30 airports in the worid for
the period January - December 1996.
Orlando is the 16th busiest airport in North America, according to ACI
data, the airport said. and is expected to serve 30 million passengers by
the year 2000.0
ON THE AGENDA...
Aug. 28-29 Aircraft Noise and Land Use Planning Workshop,
Williamsburg, VA; sgonsored by the American
Association of Airport Executives and Landrum �
Brown (contact AAAE, tel: (�03) 824-0504).
Sept 6-10 Annuat meeting of the National Association of State
Aviation O�cials, Adams Mazk Hotel, Tulsa, OK
(contact Stacey Moye at NASAO; tel: (301) 588-0587).
Sepc 22-24 Training Course on Version 5.1 of the Integrated Noise
Model, Burlington, MA; sponsored by Harris Miller
Miller & Hanson Inc. (Contact Kate Lazson; tei: (61'7)
229-0707); FaJc: (617) 229-'7939; E-Mail:
Klarson@hmmh.com; Web site:
www.hmmh.com).
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Mareuerite Lambert, Production Coordinator
Charles F. Price, Contributing Editor; Anne Jacobs, Circulation Editor; Maria T. Norton, Production Editor
Published 25 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 22011; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) '729-4528.
Price $495.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients,
is granted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Congress Street, Salem, MA, 019'70. USA.
Airport Noise Report
� GTRIfRERO Fax�770-528-7077 Sep 2'9? 1���5 P.01�03
x��v��a�,��tti�ar�� AEROSPACE AND TRANSPORTATION LABORAT{3RY
� ��or•��c� � c-. p G�l Cobb County, Building 2, Roorn 146
���� a a e 7220 Richardson Road, S�F X: {770) 528-7077
� VERIFY: (770} 528-703'1
TFLECOPIF'R MFSSAGF TRANSMITTAL LEAD SNE�T
Transmission consists of �- page(s} plus tead sheet.
Date: �Z � � %
To: � � � � F V �N � a �'� ,� I <-t'�
Company Name: �r'� NJ�nc�° �4 I'�-`"`'� �
Qddress: _ll 01 ��� �-,n� 4 Cw�.. v�c i`�.c..h..d �� �'f���-
Telecopier:
Verification:
From:
_ � r � ..- 4-5�- -- � �' � �
�- �► L-� 5"Z,-- f� s fl
� . �. � f�--�rU.��
Company Narne: Georgia Tu. e�esearch institute
Address: Pie s��see abave
Gomment/Special Instructions:
11"/T�'c%-�„�{ �j (-�-�,�� � �ol 7"�1 o Sri -�-.5'"� 6,,, r�,,-c_
— / /
��.-e. S-e � � S �-� �s'� rn .e �e..t �.` � /
y'`�. � -, TL �� � Q c,`5�7-t' u-2..� ��..�r .s,� s
� �
.� ..
� ✓ l' � ,'st /s� k � . �� . ;N � ,'S 4 �, c�r. �- � �t ���2
( � � w � 1/ cov � f�.�. �i �.� � � a-�.`� �..-.d �-�..
4
� (s �° ��� l� so � y.st i n ° `'`� .�1 �� j� , "°`�� � 1
7 -- kn %rl, �-�h � � ,
f
GTRI�AERO Fax�7?0-528-?0?7 Sep 2'9? 17�45 P.02�03
Biographp of ]Krish . I�. Ahtrj�
Dr. K. K. Ahuja received his BSc. in 1Vlechanicai En�ineerinD and M. Phil in
Aeronauticai En�ineerin; from Un.iversity of London, England, and a Doctorate in
Mechanical Engineerin� from Syracuse Uni�ersity. Syzacuse, New York. Dr. Alluja has
over 2� years of researcli and develonment experience in aircraft noise research,
dcoustics facilities desia , flow c�ntrol, state-of-the-a.rt instrun�entation, and adva�ced
si�nal processing. Dur.ing his employment af 13 yea.rs at Lockheed Geor�ia Compan.y in
various capacieies, inch�din� the head of thc Aeraaco�stics Research and Manager of clle
Advaneed Fliaht Seiences Degartment, he was the grincipai investigator andlor thc
pro�am manager on s�veral successfully completed projects func3ed by Lockheed, the U.
S. Air �orce and NASA. He joined the faculty of Georgia lnstitczte of Technolo?y as a
Senior Faculty Research Leader in March 1989.
At pres�nt, he is a Regents Researcher and Profcssor in the School nf
Aerospv.ce Bngineerin� and the Manager of the Acoustics and Aerodyuan-�i.cs Branc12 in
the Aerospace and Transportation Laboratory of Georgia Tech Research `Institute (GTRI}.
Dr. l�huja teaehes courses in. l�eroacoustics and Rocket Propulsion and is currenCly
supervising six doctoral students each working an a di.fferent issue of a.ircraft nnise.
While at Georgia Tech, he won the GTkI Outstand.in� PerFormance in Resc�rcll Award �/
�
in 1990 and t,he Geor�ia Tech widE "Outstanding Iztterdisciplin�uy Activzty Award" for
1992. In 1993, he won a prestigious Internauonal award in Aeroacouseics: The AIA�.
Aeroacoustics Award. Dr. Ahuja has �ublished over 100 articles in tl�e f cId oF noisc:.
T3z. Ahuja is �£ormer assoczate editor of tlle AIAA Journai and also a for.mer
Chairman of the AI�. Acroacoustics Technical Committcc. He is a reviewer of
teehnical articIes nublishc;d in ma�iy journa.is. kIe has been a member of many national
peer rcview com�ninces, including one in 1996 where a IO-member committee ievi�wed
NASA`s �ligh Speed Civi1 Transport's Noazle Design program.
During the O�ynzpics games in ,t'�.tlanta. Dr. Ahuja directed a Iar�e study
invoIvzng �,�asurement of h�licopter noisc usin� 100 microphones in the suburhs of
Atianta_ His work ha,5 tieen covcred by interna�.onal mectia, including CNN, BEyond
2QOQ. New York t�mcs. WaIi Street Journai, and others. IIc has been responsible for
desi�ning and buiIdin� unique noise-researeh facilities, including the I�.rgest spea.l:er
system. anyw�erc in the world with 40,000 watts oC acousiic po�ver to simttlaee realistic
sonie boozns and urcraft nozse si�natures.
[��:iQ.I�I:I��
Fax�770-528-7077 Sep 2'97 17�46 P.03�03
Krishan �. Ahu,Ja, Professor �rzd I2egents Researcher
Educ�tion
Ph.D., Mechanical Engineering, Syracuse University 197�
M.PhiI., Aeronautical En�ineering, University of London. U.K. 1972
B.Sc.(Hons.) Mechanical Engineering, University of London, U_K. 1969
N�mb�r of years of service on facuItp �
G�or�a .institute of Technology
Regents Researcher 1)94-PresEnt
CIuc:f: Acousues and �erodynamics Braneh, Acro Lab, GTX2I 1995-Present
Chief: Acoustics, Aerodyna�nics, and Advanced Vehicles Division,
Aero Lab, GTRI 1993-2995
Professor - School of Aerospace Engineering � 1�91-Pr,esent
He�.d - Acottstics Braach, Aero Laborac�ry, GTRI '1990-I993
Ac�ing I3ead - AEronautics Branch. Aero Laboratory, GT.RI 1993-1993
Senior Faculty Retearch Leader. GTRI 1989-Present
Teehrucat �rea Manager, Aeroacousties & Fluid I�ynamics, GTRI' I989-1990
Other t�elaied experience
Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Con�pany - Geor�ia Division ,
Acting Dep�rtment Manader_
Advanccd Fliaht Scicnces D�partment
Head: Acroacaustics Research Group (f\dvanced
I'7.i,�ht Sciences Deparcn�,ent); Ser�i.oi Scientist
Scientist
Full-Time Consultant in Aer�acoustics �
.;. ,:,
1983-1989
I980-I933
1.976-1980
Consulting
a. Syracuse Univcrsity, Syracuse, New York. Noise R�duction in the Universitv's
Ste��n P].�nt, 1974.
b. Lockhe�d Geargia Company, Mar.ietta, Jet Noise Research, 1976-1980.
c. Uzuversity af Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, �v'ind Tunncls. 1991.
d. CIifton Precision Company, Murphp, Nortl� Carolina, �ioCnr .Noise, 1992,
e• I�ealthDyne, Atlanta, Geor�ia, �om�ressor noise� 1994.
�. Riverside Nei�hborhood, Atlanta, Georgia, Hirllwav Nc,ise 1993.
�' Armout, Cape and Pond, Atlanta, Geor�a, En�ine Test Facilitv Desian T995-1996
h. Sirnmons Macrress Co., Atl�enta, Georgia, Ac�ustic Test Facility Desian, I996.
I. SkoviIZe Fastner5, Inc., Clarksville. Ge�r�ia, N�ise Red�uction in Factorv t?�ces
1997. �
i. Ilelicapter Associatiou Internation�, Arlinbton, Vug��, N�Ise in the Gra.nd
NationaI Canyon Park. 1997.
j. Acro Systems Engineering , Inc., St Paul Niinnesota, Noise Issttes in Automobile
Tes ' n . 199?.
Patents
Holder of U.S. Patent No. 4,483,19� in the fieId ot "Flucluati.n.� PreSsuze Me�tSu�ing
�PFai atus.,,
Appaz�.tuses and Methods For Sovnd Absorpaon Usin� Hollow Beads Loosely
Contained in an Enclostue_ (Patent awa.rded. patent number not receiv��. y��.)
�
SMAAC is opposing the proposed
e�ctensions of the south parailei runway and the
4r?2 crosswind runway Iry 1,300 and 1,000 feet
respectivety to ailow Norffiwest Airiines to reach
Hong Kong nonstop via Boeing 747-40ds, without
adequate study of the environmental impact of
such flights on affected neighborhoods.
Northwest demanded immediate
approvai of the extensions in June, but later
baciced off to allow the developmer�t of an
"enviro�mental assessment worksheeY' outli�ing
community impaci:s by December.
The airline plans to begin Hong Kong
service this fall with three flights a week from the
recently expanded II,000-foot 4122 runway, using
partially foaded planes.
Under the present plan, Hong Kong
flights wouid be switched "temporarity" to the
southem of the two parailel runways next
summer after the 1,300-foot extension is
completed. The Hong Kong trips would be
switched bacic to the 4122 permanently aiier its
e�ension is finished and other parfs of the
runway resurfaced, probabiy in 1999.
The city of Minneapolis and SMAAC have
questioned whether the parallei runway extension
wouid be abandoned so quic�ly after an $8.5
million investment. In both instances, the 747
- - - _, -�-
no�se wou pus o Richfield and
Mmneapolis neighborhoods, and invite usage by
othe� aircraft at the extended ends.
Northwest says it needs 12,000 feet of
runway spac� for fulty loaded 747-400s to make
the 1512-hour flight Oniy San Francisco and
Los Angeles offe� non-stop service from the U. S.
now. Jay Novak, state commissioner of trade
and economic development, predicis the service
witl generate $45 million in new business for the
Twin Cities yearfy.
ANNOUNCING A
CANDIDATE FORUM
7 pm, September 4, 1997
Mayflower� Congregational Church
I-35W � Diamond Lake Rd.
Candidates for Minneapoi"ts Mayo�
and 10th,11th,12th and 13th Wards wiil be
questioned on airpo�t issues. _
.�
•• •' � S
Page 1
. � �'
' � • • �
.
�
The 1996 state legisfature directed the
MAC to sign contracts wrth the ci�es of
Minneapolis, Eagan and Mendota Heights by Jan.
I, 1997 prohibiting construcction of a third paratlel
runway wiihout the consent of the affected ciities.
Mendota Heighis signed an agreement
accepting a ban through 2020, with two 10-year
add-ons. Minneapolis and Eagan are stiil
negotiating. The delay confirms the "hidden
agenda" theory of Eagan Mayor Tom Egan that
the MAC will need additional capacity about the
time the north=south runway is fiiled.
MAC's stubbomness has shocked many
Twin Cities legislators, who betieve the intent of
the bitl was a permanent ban to protect
thousands of homeowners from more noise and
health risks. But the MAC obviously wants to
keep its legai options open — even though a third
paraltel runway doesn't show on its 202Q plan.
(The MAC proposed in 1996 to acquire
the Fort Snelling soccer fields for possible future
use in a three-way land swap with the U.S.
Bureau of Mines and the Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources. It later witt�drew the idea.}
Jeff Hamiel, MAC executive director, was
quoted in the "Southwest Joumal" Juiy 23 as
"philosophicaily" unable to bring himself to
commit to a 50-year ban on a third parailel
runway —. as Mnneapolis and Eaga� have
proposed, but acknowiedged doubt that such a
runway is likely to be buitt
Hamiei was quoted as indicating that
some day pubiic offiaals will add up the costs of
congestion and delays evolving at the present site
and decide to pursue a new airport, adding that
pubiic opinion for such a decision may aiready be
buiidi�g. Other MAC officials have privatety
speculated that such a decision may be needed
in 10-12 years if traffic keeps growing ahead of
plan.
The MAC stafF is gearing up to invest
$1.3 biilion by 2007 for the north-south n�nway
(�300 millian), a new parking ramp witfi S,OOQ-
7,000 pubiic and car rental spaces ($1pp million),
3-10 new gates (cost unknown), more teRninal
improvements, expanded cargo faciiities and
cantinued noise mi�gation programs ($10Q-$16Q
miilion).
A$1.4-biilion new terminal at Cedar Ave.
and 62nd St Crosstown and five additional gates
are proposed for 201 Q-2020, depending an
passenger traffic counts then. SMAAC has long
6elieved that the-present 3,100-acre site cannot
suppart the region's needs for increased global
service in the next 20 years, and that land-
banking for a new airport should begin soan.
One of the inherent problems in long-
range planning is the historic volatiiity of the
airiine industry. Afier losing billions in the 15 years
after deregulation, the industry has tumed in four
straight years of record profitabiiifij by dividing the
country into a few "fo�tress hubs"'as Northwest
has done witt� Minneapolis-St. Paul, Detroit and
Memphis. This strategy has allowed the major
carriers to charge premium prices on non-
competifive routes.
Northwest's executive vice president af
marketing, Michae! Levine, told a Minnesota
World Trade Week luncheon in May that, for its
part, NWA intends to gcow here as fast as the
local economy requires, although it has no
intentio� of pursuing much of the cargo traffic
now being truciced to Chicaga
From a noise standpoint, NWA has taken
two encouraging steps on the equipment front in
Page 2
the past quarter. It has announced plans to buy
50-150 Airbus 319 medium-range aircraft (to
repiace some of the aging DC-9s), and to
pu�chase 24 Avro RJ85 regionai jets for Mesaba
Airlines feeder flights to replace turbop�ops over
the next four years.
11✓.i�.0 �xoa.c�e�s 1'�To�se
�� - -- � ' � � � •; J ..'ll-
.. •.��
MAC Commissioners voted Oci 28, 1996 to
approve a$100-$168 miilion package of sound
abatement ideas put together in response to the
1996 state legisiature's deqsion to e�and the
present airport site for $2.8 billion over the next
20 years rather than invest $5.8 biilion in a new
airport.
The commission adopted most of the
recommendations put forth by a Noise Mitigation
Cammittee consisting of sa MAC commissioners
representing the metropolitan area, eight metro
mayors, two Metropolitan Counal members, one
No�thwesi Airiines representative and the chair of
the Metropolitan Area Sound Abatment Counai
(MASAC).
Highlights of the plan are as follows:
I. HOME INSULATION
�1. The residential sound insulation program
(PART 150) set up in 1992 to treat 7,191 homes
and 11 schools in the 75-65 DNL noise zones witt
be compieted by 2000 as scherluied, at an
estimated cost of $220 miilion.
i2. The work will be extended to a new 60 DN�
zone (using 2005 contour lines) from 2000 to
2010, covering 3,943 to 6,357 homes, more than
500 mu(it famiiy dwellings, two nursing homes
and several day care centers at an estimated
cost of $108-$168 miilion, depending on which of
the two traffic levels occurs. An additional ?30
million is being set aside to treat homes that
might be affected by increased traffic on Runway
4/22 over Richfield.
�3. Contour lines wiil be adapted to frt natural
boundaries and neighborhood lines to the
ma�dmum extent possible.
•4. The final contour lines for the 60 DNL zones
will be based on the most accurate projection of
traffic levels and actual data recorded by
e�anding the data gathering system.
•5. Noise impact models shouid be developed
and noise mitigation techniques created to reflect
the impact of lorv-frequency ground noise from
aircraft runups and takeoffs.
11. COMMUNIIY STABILIZATION
MAC shouid partiapate witfi affected
communi�es to identiffy and quantify any impacts
of the airport on property values and/or other
negative consequenc�s to neighborhoods.
Remedial measures such as purchase and
property value guarantees and housing
replacement to complement the tax credit and
revitai'¢ation legislation adopted by the 1996
legisiature may be considered by a woridng
g�aup for submission to the 1997 legisiature.
(Tf�e woridng gon�p, to co�sist of representatives
from MAC, the Met Counal, affected
communities, legislatnre staff and Northwest
Airiines, has yet to meet) �
III. AIRPORT OPERATIONS
•1. Prohibit all Stage 2 aircraft operations after
Dec. 31,1999 (an FAA requirement now).
•2. F�ctend the voluntary night hours flight
restrictions to 10:30pm - 6:OOam from tfie
present 11 pm - 6:OOam, and allow onty Stage 3
flights during this period.
•3. Seek FAA cooperation to implement
appropriate aircraft departure procedures at each
end.
�4. Deveiop a departure procedure for Runway
22 to direct aircraft ove� areas of commeraai
development and the Minnesota River Vatley.
•5. Evaivate departure procedures in the Eagan
- Mendota Heights corridor.
1�6. Work within the aviation industry to
encourage further reductions in aircraft noise
levels (e.g.: Stage 4 engines}.
(
,
- ' Page 3
07. Incorporate appropriate penatties for airlines
violating Stage 2 restrictions, noise abatement
procedures and night hours flighis.
•8. Increase the number of noise monito�s in
areas affected by increased traffic on the two
parallel runways and the soon-to-be-built narth-
south runway. Use this data to coRoborate the
accuracy of computer models cuRentty in use to
define noise contours.
N. RUNWAY USE
�t1. Commence construcfion of the no�th-south
runway in 1998 and complete it by 2003.
�t2. In the interim, use Rurnvay 422 for noise
mitigation by construcling necessary additional
ta�aways (now
scheduled for
1999). Acquire
affected hames
in Richfield witfiin
iwo years after
the ta�m+vay
contracts are let.
Insuiate eligible
homes as soon
as taxiway
contracts are let.
?t3. If the north-
south runway is
compteted
before insutation
of all eligible
homes is
finished, the
insulation
progrzm for the
4J22 areas may
be terminated.
in no case does MAC intend to call on affected
residents or their local govemments for financial
support Nowever, the MAC stipulates that it must
retain an A bond rating during the financing
periad for insuiation programs to continue.
SMAAC is pieased that this noise mitigation
"blueprin�", as Steve Ctame� described it at the
fali 1996 membership meeting, has been
formuiated. Unfortunately, the effecis of the plan
on south Mnneapolis are going to be negl'�gible
until three events occur.
a. The conversion of all aircraft serving
MSP to Stage 3 fleets by 2000;
b. The red"utribution of up to 17 percent
of the airport's daily traffic from the two
SMAAC COMMENTS
If this noise mifigation plan is implemented, MSP
will be the first in the U.S. to fund 60 DNL zone
sound insulation work. The FAA doesn't
recognize sound problems beyond the 65 DNL
zone. Thus, MAC will need to rely largely on
intemally generated funds - through the $3
passenger facility charge (PFC), ai�line fanding
and space rental fees, terminai concession fees,
parking and car rental fees - along with some
possible federai and state aid.
parallels to the 4/22 runway (not possible
until the proposed ta�aways are done in
1999);
c. The north-south runway is completed
�n 2003); even then, much unce�tainty
remains as to possible occasional use of
that runway for northbound takeoffs, and
the amount of ground noise generated
on takeoffs to the south.
OfFsetting the foregoing potential benefits are
Page 4
�
projectd growth in air traffic overhead; these
, projections range from a low of 1 percent a year
as assumed in MAC's current 2020 plan, to the 5
- 7 percent growth experienced in the recent past
SMAAC also agrees with many of the
concems raised by Suzanne M. Sandahl, a public
member of the State Advisory Coundi on
Metropolitan Airport Planning from Ricl�field,
namely that the mitigation p(an:
1. Does not provide a mechanism for
independent monitoring of progress made toward
objectives;
2. Needs to better identify prioRties
beiween capital improvements at the airport s�i:e
and noise m�igation offsite if MAC doesn't
maintain its A bond rating;
3. Needs to establish a specific
percentage link befwee� capital expendiiures and
noise mfigation efforts;
4. Doesn't require MAC to take into
account any community's long-range
development pians in MAC's lang-range
mfigation plan;
5. Should require MAC to sesk an
opinian fram the state attomey general on the
legal'rty of starting any canstrucciian before the
FAA issues a record of decision (finat approva�
of a pending environmental impact statement —
in this case, on the north-south runway. (That
opinion is expected in November or December
1997.) _
265,000 Hear Nois�
Around Airpor�
A little noticed fact found in the Noise M'figation
P1an is that the MAC estimates apPro�amatety
265,000 persons live in the 50+ DNL noise zones
surrounding the airpo�t, according to 1990
census data and the projected shape of that
noise contour in 2005. That's more than 10
percent of the Twin Cities metro area population
of 2.5 million.
Nearly 1,000 of them turned out to object to tf�e
noise disruption at a public hearing at the
Thunderbird Hotel in Bloomington in August 1996
;
held by the MAC at the close of the Noise
M'rtigation Committee's deliberations.
Another 500+ showed up at public meetings held
by Mnneapol'�s Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton to
callect suggestions on noise contours in the th�ee
wards - the 11th,12th and 13th. SMAAC
representatives testified at all of them.
Stage 3 Status Report at
MSP
MSP has one of the lowest rates of Stage 3
usage of any major airport in the nation. MSP
was at 52.3 percent Stage 3 as of August 1996,
up from 45.3 percent at the end of 1995. The
problem is due largly to the high perce�tage of
Stage 2 DG9s remaining in Northwest's fleet
These are being converted to Stage 3 at the rate
of about 35 planes per year. �
An FAA ombudsman appearing at a MASAC
meeting in Minneapol'�s in July foresees the most
dramatic improvement in noise levels occuring i�
1999 when the remaining 1,000+ DG9s are
canverted or retired from U.S. fleets.
,
� • ► ,, •
�
Last fall the C'�zens League of Minneapol'�s raised
questions about the staie's readiness to compete in
gfobal maricets. In a repo�t entitled "Compete
Globally, Thrive Locaily," the league chailenged
state and local governments to create a strategy to
guide decisions and public spending on acnvities
that shape long-#erm economic growtfi, including
education and infrastructure.
Since the report was issued, a few modest steps
have been taken by govemment in response.
1. At the urging of Twin Cities legislators,
an Advisory Council on Minnesota's Economic
Future was created by the 1997 session to:
a. Agree on a set of strategic goals to
Pa$e 5
guide the state through 2010;
b. Develop a set of indicators to measure
progress toward those goals, and
c. Develop a mechanism to renew and
update strategies and goals regularly and report to
the people.
The advisory councii's 13 members wiil consist of
three commissioners: Ann Schiuter, director of
strategic and long-range planning; Wayne
Simoneau, finance commissioner, and Jay Novak,
commissioner of trade and economic development,
plus 10 legislators (none of whom had been
named as of Aug. l.)
The cauncil is to call on
business and academic
expetts for help in
formulating the plan,
whici� is due by Feb.15,
1998. Then the
council's life e�cpires.
2. The
Hennepin County Office
of Planning and
Development is
organizing an
intemational business
roundtable led by
fotmer West Publishing
ate orv
Majar carriers
Regionals
Charters
Airfreight
Generat aviation
Mi1'�tary
president Vance
Opperman to discuss
metro area infrastructure needs, and
MSP Has Record Year in
1996
Passenger traffic at MSP increased 7.5
perc$nt to a record 28.8 million in 1996 from 26.8
million in 1995, according to MAC.
The number of flights by all aircraft rose
4.3 percent to 485,480 from 465,354 a year
earlier. The growth rate was well above the one
percent annual gain projected by MAC in its
� 996 Flight Totals by Category
1996 �995 % ChanQe
298,032 283,166 + 5.25
105,926 106,763 - .78
8,750 6,832 +28.07
20,362 15,909 +27.99
49,786 49,769 + .03
2.624 2.915 - 9.98
Totais . . . • • . 485,480 465,354 +4.32
3. The MAC staff is preparing a mo�e
aggressive intemationai marketing pragram for .. "
1998 to buiid name recognifion among overseas
travelers and shippers unde� the theme: "MSP:
America's North Coast Gateway."
Meanwhile, Northwest has announced plans to
begin non-strop senrice to Hong Kong in October.
Icelandic Air wiil open north Atlantic service in April
1998. And MAC officials are wooing Air Chine.
"Compared with marlceting programs of ott�er U. S.
airports such as Chicago, Detroit and Atlanta,
however, these efforts are trivial," says one Twin
Cities legislator. "We need to do more."
long-range (2020) forecast to the state legislature
in 1996.
(In fact, the MAC's long-range forecast
appears so conservative that even if the annual
growth rate recedes to 3 percent MSP will exceed
iis 2020 low-end estimate of 520,000 flights a
year by 2000-20 years ahead of scheduie.)
NorthwestAirlines' domination continued
in 1996. It carried 83.4 percent of all MSP
passengers in Decem6er. United was second at
3.96 percent, followed by American (2.96
percent), Delta (2.23 percent), TWA (1.8
percent), US Airways (1.31 percent), Continental
(1.17 percent) and America West (1.06 percent).
Pa�e 6 �'
�
Discount ca�riers made up the res�t.
For the first six months of 1997, passenger traffic
was up 5.6 percent, while flighfs were up onty 1.3
percent The slowdown in the growth rate may
have been due in part to bad weather in January-
February and in part to the twamonth cessation
of Great Lakes Aviation service here as the result
of FAA maintenance checks.
The boom in traffic produced record �evenues of
$105.2 mitlion for MAC in 1996, up 18 percent
from $87.2 million in 1995.
The airport's net worth rose to $637.5 million
from $532 million.
Concession revenues (from auto parldng, food
and beverage and merchandise saies) grew 14.4
percent to $47.9 million in 1996. Airiine charges,
including landing and ramp fess, noise su�charge
and terminal building rates, climbed 1.3 percent
to �35.6 miilion. Other revenues, including
ground and building rentai fees,-utility charges
and charges for other MAC services climbed 118
percent to 21.7 million.
. � � � • �
_ _
� . , � � � • �
. � .
By Neil C3ark
At the �nneapolis-St Paul Airport (MSP) the
ma�dmum aircraft arrival rate' in 1992 was 1 per
minute. In 2020 it is predicted to be 12 per
minute. Total average operation rates were
actually 1.98 per minute in 1992 and projected to
be 2.38 per minute in 2020. This number has a
lot to do with the capaciiy of the aitport because
people like to arrive home about dinner time and
leave for a trip in the evening. The peak capacity
has a lot to do with delay times once in the
aircraft. Waiting in the aircraft wastes fuel and
time for all involved. Waiis of up to 15 minutes
can be tolerated, but when they �each an hour
passengers and airlines are really annoyed. So
much so that airparfs use this numbe� as a
measure of airport quality and a concem that
passengers wiil seek other means of
transportation.
Use of gate areas, ta�rn,vays and ground aircraft
traffic management are important in reducing
delays, but the chief delay is usualty wa�ing in
line for take-off or in the air for landing. The
number of operations per minute that can be
safe(y performed is a key measure of airport
capacity. Wrth the runways now in operation at
MSP the FAA has indicated 2.4/min. is safe in
goad weather. Can this be increased by better
ta�aways and by using more modem technology?
If so, it will probably be done.
At Chicago's O'Hare airport, the Alliance of
Residents Conceming O'Hare, lnc. has leamed
that, apparently, with FAA approval, Air Traffic
Controllers will reduce the interval beiween
arrivals to 22 seconds on the same runway. This
is 2.73 arrivais per minute. If this is allowed at
MSP the arrival rate for our two runways wouid
be 5.46/min, which is more than twice the rate
predicted for 2020 at MSP. Is this is a good way
to increase MSP capaciiy? If this is true, there wiil
be plenty of capacity at MSP without a third
parallel runway.
"Dual Track Airport Planning Process, Draft Environmental
Impact Statement, Dec. 1995.
�� � ,__ � Pa�e 7
� ' � � � �
.
♦ � � � �,
. ' 1 �
..... Getting Arou.nd
SIV�[,AA,C AI)DS 100
SMAAC has added 100 new members since
April, and is looldng for more ...
Get a line on candidates' views on airport issues
by attending our speaal Candidates Fon�m at
7pm Sept 4 at the MayFlower Congregational
Church. In addition to all mayoral candidates,
we've invited contenders for City Cauncit seats in
the 1Qth, 11th,12th and 13th Wards. ...
SMAAC volunteers wiil d'wtribute literature at
neighbo�hood summer festivals again this year.
The 1997 schedule includes Hale, Page,
Diamond �ake's "Picnic In The Park" Juiy 27 at
Todd Field, Lynnhurst's celebration August 7 at
Lynnhurst Field, SQth and Girard Ave. S.,
BancrofY's event from noon to 4pm August 10 at
42nd St. and Bloomington Ave. S., Kenny's event
August 20 from 5 to 8pm at Kenny Park, SSth
and Fremont, and Wndom's event from 3-7pm
Sept. 21 at Windom Scttool, 58th and Wentworth
Ave.S....
SMAAC President Dick Saunders and VP Frank
Ario have spoken at neighborhoqd association
meetings in Windom (May 8), Hale, Page,
Diamond Lake (June 16) and Linden Hills (July
1). Saunders made appearances at the Richfield
IGwanis Club and Lake Street Lions Club in July.
Interest in long-range airport development
aitematives was high. . . .
Saunders aiso testified at a public hearing May
13 in Bioomington on the need for more effective
nationai controls on aircraft noise pollution and
tobc air emissions. The hearing was sponsored
by eight federai agencies with jurisdicbon over
airways and aircraft technology, including the
FAA, NASA and the Air Force. ...
SMAAC members congregated outside the
Thunderbird Hotel during the federal agency
conference to display posters objecting to airport
enroachmenis on cibzens' lives in nine ciiies
around the U.S and England. The event earned
coverage in the Star Tribune and on WCCO
Radio. . . .
Posters we�e prepared for Alliance of Residents
Conceming O'Hare, Chicago; C'ttizens Against
Airport Pollution, San Jose, CA; Calorado
Caal"fion Against Airpo�t Noise, Denver, Sane
Aviation for Everyone, Long isrand, N.Y.; Airport
Neighbors Decide, Columbus, OH; Citizens
Against Sea-Tac expansion, Seatde-Tacoma,
WA; Noise Clearing House, Montpelier, Vi';
Ci6zens Against Runway Two; Manchester
England; and SMAAC. . .
SMAAC is parficipating in discussions with at least
12 other ci�tizzen groups about the formation of a
national coalition late� this year. ...
HOW YOU C�� H�LP
StiIAAC is entirely a volunteer-run organization.
Your donations and your help —even if only for an
hour a week or a month— are welcome. Our
needs inciude:
�t those interested in fund-raising,
X accounting,
�t legislative relations,
� media relations,
% research,
�t special-event planning and
� Intemet web siie development.
Pa�e 8
�; �
Please contact Dick Saunders at 869-1501 for
more details.
( � �� � (i � � i ( ' �� ;�i� ,'
7�, � I,'
Many airports in the U.S. rank among the top 10
industrial poiluters in their respecfivve a�es,
according to a recently-released repart by the
Natural Resources Defense Counal (NRDC), a
non-govemmental environmental group.
On the basis of survey responses from 4S of tfie
125 busiest airports in the U.S. and on research
in offical files on the 50 busiest airports, the
NRDC found that significant environmental
impacts were common to most of the airporfs
surveyed, and that the reguiatory frameworlc
cu�rently in place is inadequate. Commeraal
flighis are the heaviest polluters.
Ozone (the principal component of srnog),
volatile organic compounds (espeaalty
hazardous to health), and nitrogen o�odes (also a
i' � smog component) are being praluced bythe
hundreds of millions of pounds by commeraal
aviation. ln 1893, aircraft at IJ.S. airporfis
produced 350 miilion pounds of these by-
producfs, more than iwice the amount produc,�d
in 1970. Federal law does not reguiate this
pollution, and the Federal govemment forbids
States and their locaii�es to reguiate it.
NRDC recommends that airport based pollution
be regulated in the same manne� as emissions
ftom other large sources, and that such pollution
be covered in state air pollution plans. Airports
should also be required to report their to�ac
emission to the official To�ac Release lnventory,
like other polluters. .
The report alsa notes excessive noise pollution,
recommending a shift from the present 65 DNL
metric to 55 DNI., and including singie-event
noise as a factor to be considered.
Use of hazardous materials at airports was
criticized, especially the present weak system for
controlling and reporting of ground-water and
employee-health hazards from use of ethyiene
glycoi as a de-icing compound.
Federai air-pollution rules restrict the total
amount of poilution that is ailowed in an area, not
the amount emitted by any particular sou�ce.
Thus wi#h airporfs and airiines essentialiy�exempt
from controls, their pollution is, in effect, charged
to the account of the other industriai saurces,
uvho must bear the costs of reducing their own
emissions and the equivalent of excess emission
from airpo�t and airiine achfivvities.
Home Insulation Work
SIOWS
Since the adoption in April of new and more
stringent testing procedures for ventilation
problems before home insulation can be
undertaken by the MAC, the pace of the Part 150
sound a6atement program has slowed
considerably!
Upwards of 80 percent of homes checked have
faiied the pre-test Homeowners may find it
necessary to finance the necessary, upfront
repairs themseives before re-entry into the
program, according to MAC. This is creating a
hardship for many homeowners!
The MAC estimates it will complete work on
about 800 homes this year vs. a goal of 1200 per
year through 2000 to finish the 65 DNL backlog,
all in Minneapol'�s.
1' I I / �.
' ' I
The airline industry has been encouraged and
suppo�ted by public funds since its inception. The
U.S. Govemment, mainly through the FAA, the
Weather Bureau, Dept. of Transportation, and
military developments, are now dedicated to
continuing support of the infrastructure on which
the airiine industry rides. All ttie airports are buiit
and operated from public funds at the local level.
The airline industry has been provided a platform
on which to contribute a service.
In May of 1991, the State of Minnesota provided a
Pa�e 9
$838 miliion financial aid package to Nortiiwest
Ai�lines (NWA) to heip the airiine ovoid
bankruptcy, stabilize jobs at the (�Gnneapolis SL
Paul airpo�t (MSP) and help build a mairrtenance
facility in Northern Minnesota.
On this public provided platform, we throw all the
airlines and say "compete" expeccfing, in this free
market, to be provided with superior air
transportation at the lowest cos#. Since
deregulation in 1981, the average cost per
passenger mile has dropped from 12.7 cents per
mile to 8 cents adjusted for inflation. Then why do
we compiain? The devii is in the averaging. Some
communities are better off riding on the bacics of
those that are not
Unfortunately, every competitor in this marfcet
has on iis agenda "idll the competition" for
obvious reasons. Airlines do not want
competition. They want the public pladform to use
as they see frt to provide high retum on
investmenfis for stocichoiders. it wouid be
fortuitous if this aiso provided the bes# pubiic
senrice.
How the airiines compete is described in the Juty
1997 issue of "Consumer Reports" magaane
(CR):
�The Ticicet Price Maze A flight surveyed by CR
out of Chicago's O'Hare reveated that there were
fou�teen different round trip fares for identical
coach service by this carrier. The highest was
Key Pfione Number°s
MSP Noise Hot Line . . . . . . . . . .
Part 150 Program Office . . . . . . .
MAC Headquarters . . . . . . . . . . . .
MAC Commissioner Steve Cramer . .
MAC Commissioner Joe Gasper . . .
Minneapolis Mayo� Sayies Belton . .
11th Ward Councii Member
Dore' Mead . . . . . . .
12th Ward Council Member
Dennis Schulstad . . . .
13th Ward Council Member
Steve Minn . . . . . . .
726-9411
725-6251
726-8100
825-6652
823-4198
673-2100
673-2211
673-2212
673-2213
$1115 and the lowest was $216. Air fares are
unpredictable and unstable. The ►owest cost
carrier is difficult to identify. The same carrier can
be lowest cost on some routes and high cost on
others.
•Revenue Manaoement. As flight departure date
draws near, tictcet prices are bumped higher and
higher depending on demand. Demand is a
funcfion of many variables including promation,
season, route, destination and competitiiion.
Passengers could not possibly know all this in
advance.
�Gate_�easina, q way fo� a carrier to avoid
competition at a particular airpo�t is to dominate
gate leases. At MSP, NWA controls the leases on
75% of ali gates. Since the Metropolitan Airports
Commission (MAC) oifiers substantial discounts
on long term Ieases, NWA can control more than
it actualiy uses and charge a competitor a rate
substantially above what it pays. As a resutt,
NWA short haul fare rates at MSP average 59
cents per mile!
•A_imort Slots. Precious takeoff and landing time
slois at busy airparts are limited during the
preferred hours and are therefore assigned.
Camers who are fortunate enough to have been
assigned slofs in the 198ps now feel ownership
and may offer some to a competitor at the right
price. Lack of slot time during the busy hours in
the moming and evening is a severe deterrent to
competi�on. At airports wittt ►imited slots the
fares ranged from 24°� to 46°� higher then at
airports without such limitations.
•O hans_ t_iving in a smaller city within a few
hundred miles of a hub can be most
unfortunate for air travefers. These are tigf�tly
controlled markets by the dominant carrier at
the hub and resuit in an average fare in excess
of 30 cents per mile. From Minneapolis to Fargo
the fare i� 59 cenfs per mile.
The safety of low-fare carriers has been
questioned, but not-proven. The FAA does a
good job of policing all carriers. However, a
safeiy record requires time. Most of the low-Pare
camers are new and have very littte record to
show whereas the big carriers have excellent
safety records.
Pa�e 10
C
;/.
;,
At MSP, the fares surveyed by the General
Accounting Office (GAO) and repo�ted by CR
we�e higher at MSP than at most othe� airports- A
few comparisons are:
CITY RANGE, Miles COST PER MHe
Denver Less than 300 39# tu 54l�
300 to 750 9� to 31 f
750 to 1500 64 � ��
above t5oo 5# to �3�
Minneapolis . Less than 300 4�# ��
300 to 750 9t` � �
750 to 1500 4f � �sf
above 1500 `� � ��f
Seattie Less than 300 15� fio 3F�
300 to 750 s¢ to t0�
750 to 1500 4# to '10�
above 1500 � � �a
At a nationai air sennce roundtable held in
February 1997 in Chattanooga, TN, the Star
Tribune' s Tony Kennedy reported MSP has 45°�6
higher fares than 33 other non-cons�ained hubs.
Predatory pricing was suggested as the major
reason for the differences. But, accorci'mg to
Lewis Jorcian, CEO of Valujet Airlines this s harc!
to prove. Valujet has some recent e�erience at
Attanta. Just before their unfortunate aash in the
Everglades in May 1996, the fare beiween Mobiie
and Atlanta was $58. After Valujet suspended
service, the fare went up to $404. When Vaiujet
started service again, the $404 fare charged by
Defta went down to $29.
Several suggestions were made at the
Chattanooga roundtabie:
•Have DOT better define predatory priang,
and provide better poiicing.
•Have the government re-regulate fares at
constrained hubs.
•Have the government intervene when gate
leasing and takeoff slots are constrained.
George Doughty, Director of the �ehigh-
Northhampton Airport Authority in Pennsyivania,
accused seven airiines, including NWA, of
maintaining a cartel, "designed to keep fares high
and available seat capacity�low."
,
� -�--;-- J��..�.
....�.-
�• •
.�
�
'1 ► ►�t' : : ► � JI ."�.
Northwest Airiines (NWA) must deai with a
_. consumer lawsuit over the alleged federal
aniitrust law violations and monopoiy pricing
practices at MSP since NWA's merger with
Republic Airlines in 1986.
The suit was filed June 16 in U.S. D'istrict Court in
Minneapolis by sa Twin Cities law firms, including
Wnthrop 8� Weinstine, Lindquist & Vennum, and
four smailer firms. The suit claims NWA
overcharged customers by about $400 million a
year. lf successful, the refund could cover four
years of actual damages and a tripling for
puniirve damages. NWA denied the charges.
V11ANT TO VOI.UNTEER IN SMAAC?
SEE PAGE 8, = � . • . , � ��—
CO�UMN 2. �'" � - . • . - � ''—
THANK YOU VERY MUCHI
� � @ J�� ��
Published Intermittently by the South
Metro Airport Action Council.
Board of Directors:
Dicic Saunders: President
Meg Parsons: Secretary
Eiieen Scully, Treasurer
Frank Ario, First V.P.
Neil C1ark, Second V.P.
Gary Bourg
Chuck Mamer
Greg Bastien
S�C
5116 Calumbus Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55417
(612) 822-$118
Pa�e 11
,� I J S' S NW (�t'� �'a N���° u�l✓
� �, � -�, � '� , .� c�,'� �/1 I o r/
�o�.�.+.,�, s! u ; �".pH '�-1.' �
�. a p � a t��, -�.-a !'`t t'' '/�d�
r�
a�rs �g a�xosNoas
�wo'
�sanss� �odaie uo pauogsanb aq ��inn sp�eM y�E 4
pue y}�� 'y�� G'y;p � ay� w s�eas �i�uno� �o
�o� pue �o�(e�y si�odeauuiW �o� sa�epipue�
:p� a�e� puoweia � MSE
y��ny� �euoi�e6a�6uo� �anno��,CeW
L66 � `� �aqwa�dag 'wd �
Wf1210� 31b'alaN`d"J
b' JNI�Nt10NNd
�=m�g�sn �1b2� 51�(19 8 !. L8-ZZB�Z 1.9)
L �1�� NW `si�odeauwW
�����I� 'g 'any snqwnlo� 9 6 I.S
� �'d�dWS
�I�Nf10� NOil�d 12lOd2lltJ Oal�W H1flOS
SMAAC ENRO�LMENT - RENEWAL FORM
Send to: SMAAC
5116 Columbus Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55417
General ($15)
Name
Address
City
Supporting ($25) Contributing ($50)
Phone
State Zip
Please checic if you are willing to serve on a SMAAC committee
The number on your mailing labe! indicates the last year of paid membership. Please renew if not current.
SMAAC is a citizen's group and your participation is vitai. Your dues provide the funds to inform elected
leaders in the govemment, the SMAAC member�hip, and the general public on airport matters.
\
'v.�r .
AGENDA �� � �J� � -
REGULAR MEETING �!,� , .� � � �,9�' ."
-� ; ; .�;.:,,..,
, � EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSIO'N-= "_�--�'L�� J—..� '
EAGAN, MINNESOTA �� �J
�w
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
September 4,1997
7:00 P.M.
I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA �
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
III. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
IV. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. MASAC Representation
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. 1997-98 Commission Goals
VI. WORKSHOP REPORT
VII. STAFF REPORT
-� A. Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor/Part 150 Request
B. MA,SAC Update
C. Noise Abatement Departure Profile Status
D. Northern Dakota County Airport Relations Coalition
VIII. INFORMATIVE
IX. FUTURE AGENDA
X. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING = 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, October 14 .
NEXT COMMISSIOlv WORKSHOP - 7:00 p.m. Thursday, September 25
NEXT MASAC MEETING - 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, September 23
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for persons witlz disabilities wil! be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less
tl:an 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide strch ard. �
(