The URL can be used to link to this page

05-14-1997 ARC PacketCITY C1F IVIENDOTA HEIGHTS - �►IRPOR'T FiELATIfJIVS CUMMISSIOtV AGEND�! May 14, 1997 - � p.rn. - Large Conference Room � ; 1. Call to Order - 7 p.m. 2. introduction of New Commissioner - George May 3. Roil Call . 4. Approval of April 9, 1997 Meeting Minutes. 5. Unfinished and Newr Business: a. Discussion of Noise Abatement Departure Profiles (Memo on Monday) b. Discuss Article Topics for May Heights Highlites c. Review City Council Targefi Issues on Airport Noise ' 6. ` 1Jpdates a. Roger's Lake BoundaryBlock:Request b. FAA Tower Dedication - c. MASAC Executive Committee Meeting on April 22, 1997 7. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence• ' a. IVIASAC /�genda for April 22, 1997 and March 25, 1997 Minutes b. IVIASAC's Technical Advisor's Report for March 1997 c. MASAC's Monthly Complaint Summary for March 1997 d. IVIASAC's Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for March 1997 e. MASAC Operations Committee Minutes for April 7, 1997 f. NDCARC Minutes for April 15, 1997 � g. Airport Noise Report h. Northwest Airlines Stage III Compliance Report - April 22, 1997 L Eagan ARC Agenda for May 15, 1997 ' 8. Other Comments or Concerns. 9. Adjourn. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request atJeast 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 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUtVTY, MINNESOTA AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSiON MItVUTES APRIL 9, 1997 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations commission was held on Wednesday, April 9, 1997 in the City Hali Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was calied to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Beaty, Leuman, Stein, Fitzer, Gross and Des Roches. Commissioner May was excused. Also present were City Administrator Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. IIVTRODUCTION OF IVEW COMMISSIOIVERS Chair Beaty welcomed new Airport Relations Commissioner Mary Des Roches. Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that new Commissioner George May had informed him that he would be on a family vacation and that he would be present at the May meeting. Batchelder also informed the Commission that orientation materials had been sent to each new Commissioner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Leuman moved approval of the March 12, 1997 Minutes. Commissioner Fitzer seconded the motion. AYES: 5 IVAYS: 0 PRESENTATION OF FAA VIDEO HOW NOISE CONTOURS ARE MEASURED Administrator Batchelder explained that the FAA video had been shown at a NDCARC meeting. He stated that this Commission had indicated their interest in viewing the video. The video discussed the basic physics of noise and how daily life is affected by noise. Noise abatement efforts was discussed and the FAA Part 150 � 1 _ A/RPORT RELATIONS COMM/SSION - APR/L 9, 1997 MEET/NG ') Program was highlighted. The decibel scale was reviewed. r The video discussed DNL contours and how noise attenuation procedures are being administered using these contours. Sound comparisons between Stage il and III aircraft was reviewed. ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON AVIATION NOISE (F1CAN) PUBLIC FORUM OtV NOISE RESEARCH - MAY 13, 1997 Administrator Batchelder stated that this forum will be held at the Thunderbird Hotel on May 13. He explained that the FICAN is soliciting input from the general public and technical community regarding the direction of Federal researchers to share research goals and results. Batchelder stated that he may attend the forum. DISCUSS FAA FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF NON-SIMULTANEOUS DEPARTURE PROCEDURES Administrator Batchelder reviewed a letter dated May 13, 1997 from Mr. � John A. Clayborn, Manager, Operations Branch - FAA informing the City that the Great Lakes Region Air Traffic Division, Operations Branch, has approved and issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSIj as it relates to the noise abatement procedures utilized in the Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor. Chair Beaty inquired if the City has heard from Eagan regarding this FONS1. Batchelder responded that Eagan's legal counsel is reviewing the FONSI. Commissioner Leuman inquired when,this noise abatement procedure will become a tower order. Batchelder stated he would inquire with Mr. Wagoner. Chair Beaty inquired how this procedure will affect head-to-head operations at MSP and what procedure will take precedent. Beaty stated that by restricting head-to-head operations over the corridor, will help eliminate night time air noise. AlRPORT RELATJONS COMM/SS/ON - APR/L 9, 1997 MEET/NG 2 �,_ DISCUSS MAC STRATEGIC PLAN AND MACE RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER JILL SMITH Administrator Batchelder explained that Councilmember Smith had been awakened in the early morning hours with a low flying aircraft. He explained that she called the MAC noise line and was asked by the individual what zip code she lives in. She responded 55120 and was then informed by the individual that anyone living in the zip code 55120 is "open season for air noise". Batchelder stated that the Council directed him to send a letter to Jeff Hamiel regarding this incident. Batchelder stated that he had received a call from Mr. Hamiel who indicated his concern over this matter. Batchelder informed the Commission that in response to the City's request for clarification on this issue, the MAC sent a copy of a"draft" strategic plan for the MAC. Chair Beaty stated that he had read this document and found that there is nothing that specifically deals with air noise in this document. Commissioner Des Roches inquired if Councilmember Smith approves of the MAC's response. Batchelder stated that he will include this information in the Council's packet for their comment. � � � � ` UPDATES '�•- „- :•_1�. : • . i'!. The Commission acknowledged receipt of a copy of a letter sent by the City dated April 1, 1997 fio Mr. Robert Johnson, Chair - Policy Advisory Committee which formally requests the PAC's consideration of the eligibility of four properties that may be within the 1996 DN� 65 Contour, and thus eligible for sound insulation as a boundary block. Chair Beaty stated that it makes sense to include these homes within the DNL 65 Contour. Batchelder informed the Commission that he has also been informed that Mr. Courtney Pinc, the individual who petitioned the MAC to include houses on the north side of Wagon Wheel within the contaur, did not get included for sound insulation. The Commission discussed the funding of the Part 150 program and how the MAC anticipates the program to be completed by the years 2000 or 2002. It was noted that the MAC is not sure if the program will continue at the existing funding level if the Contour goes out to Ldn 60. � � AIRPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SS/ON - APR/L 9, 1997 MEETING 3 Administrator Batchelder stated that he wili request Mr. Steve Vecchi to provide the City with information on the criteria for defining boundary � blocks. ACKiVOWLEDGE NEWS ARTICLES ON NON-SINiULTANEOU� DEPARTIDRE PROCEDURES The Commission acknowledged receipt of a March 23, 1997 SouthWest Review article and a March 26, 1997 Sun Current article regarding non- simultaneous departure procedures. It was noted that several mistakes were made in the articles. ACKNOWLEDGE POSTPONEMENT OF 1997 COIVSTRUCTION ON RUNWAY 17 R The Commission discussed how the postponement of the Runway 11 R construction will provide the impetus to begin construction of the north/south runway. It was noted that Mendota Heights would have seen some air noise over the summer with the construction of Runway 11 R. REVIEW MASAC OBJECTIVES FOR 1997 The Commission acknowledged receipt of the proposed 1997 MASAC � objectives. ACKIVOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS REPOR'TS/CORRESPONDEIVCE The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Agenda for March 25, 1997 and February 25, 1997 Minutes. It was noted that web site access will soon be made available at the MAC. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC's Technical Advisor's Report for February 1997. The Commission noted that the use of Runway 4-22 was up 11 percent in February. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC"s Monthly Complaint Summary for February 1997. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC's Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for February 1997. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Operations /, A/RPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SS/ON - APR/L 9, 1997 MEET/NG 4 `t_ Committee Agenda and Minutes for March 21, 1997. Administrator � Batchelder informed the Commission that Mr. John Foggia has agreed to provide Mendota Heights with a debriefing on the Noise Abatement Departure Profiles. Chair Beaty suggested that the City consider requesting a formal testing procedure using the different departure procedures. He suggested that the City consider lobbying support from the City of Eagan and also the NDCARC. Commissioner Gross was excused at 9:05 p.m. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the NDCARC Minutes for February 21, 1997. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Airport Noise Report. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Airport Relations Commission adjourned its meeting at 9:25 p.m. RespectFully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary I � AlRPORT RELAT/ONS COMM/SS/ON - APR/L 9, 1997 MEEI/NG 'rJ' �e � 1 / � • ;I p May 12, 1997 To: Airport Relations Commission From: Kevin Batchelder, City Administrator Subject: Action Items for Wednesday Night's Agenda * Noise Abatement Departure Profiles * MASAC 8ylaws and Quorum Voting DI5CUSSION The Metropolitan Airports Com�mission (MAC) staff has briefed the MASAC Opera.tions Committee and MASAC about their proposal to implement the Close-In departure procedure for all departures off the Minneapolis end of the parallel runways (29L and 29R). MAC staff is recommending that the Distant depariure procedure be continued for all departures over the Eagan-Mendota Heights corridor. On April 28, 1997, Mr. John Foggia, of MAC, made a presentation to Mendota ;' '� Heights o�cials and answered questions regarding this recommendation. Attached you will -� find Pazcel Count information for each community by Distant and by Close-In departure procedures that was distributed at this briefing. According to this information, Mendota. Heights would have 101 fewer homes in the LDN 65 noise contour with a change to the Close In departure procedure. However, because Eagan and In�er Grove Heights are better served with a Distant departure procedure, MAC staff is not recommending any cha.nges for our end of the runway. Appazently, the Airlines Pilots Association (ALPA) and the FAA. have taken the position that they will not accept clifferent procedures off the same ends of the parallel runways. MASAC will be considering this as a voting item at their May 27, 1997 meeting and the Airport Relations Commission should make a recommenda,tion to City Council to assist Councilmember 7ill Smith, our MASAC representa.tive. I will be prepared to bring the Commission up to date on the issue of Noise Abatement Departure Profiles at our meeting. The other issue to be discussed is a Voti.ng Notice received from MASAC regarcling the installation of Sunfish Lake as a voting member of MASAC and a proposed change in the quorum voting rules of the MASAC By-la.ws. (P1ea.se see attached Voting Notice; Apri.l 22, 1997 MASAC Executive Committee m.i.nutes and MASAC roster/bylaws.) Councilmember Smith has asked that the Airport Rela.tions Commission consider these items for recommendation to City Council. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 17. 12. 13. METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUIVD ABATEMENT COUNCII. General Meetina April 22, 1997 7:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. 6Q40 28th Avenue South- . Minneapolis, Minnesota Call to Order, Roll Call Approval of Minutes of Meeting March 25, 1997 Introduction of Invited Guests Receipt of Communications Technical Advisor's Runway System Utilization Report and Complaint Summary Executive Committee Update (Vote item) Operations Committee Update Noise Abatement Departure Profiles (NADPs) Briefing Federai Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FiCAN) Briefing Report on NWA Stage 111 Compliance - Jennifer Sayre Report of the MAC Commission Meeting Persons �shing to Address the Councii Other Items fVot on the Agenda Adjournment Next Meeting: May 27, 1997 C � MINUTES METROPO�ITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL GENERA� MEETING March 25, 1997 7:30 p.m. 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 1. Call to Order Roll Cail The meeting was calied to order by Chairman Bob Johnson at 7:40 p.m. and the secretary was asked to call the roll. The foliowing members were in aftendance. Bob Johnson �Mark Salmen Jennifer Sayre Brian Bates Jim Semn John Richter Carol McGuire Tom Hueg Dawn Weitzel Kristal Stokes Petrona Lee Jill Smith �ance Staricha Tom Egan Ed Porter Dale Hammons Manny Camilon Advisors Cindy Greene Traci Erickson Chad Leqve Visitors Brian Simonson 1 M BAA NWA NWA Airbome Minneapolis Minneapolis St: Paul St. Paul Richfield Richfield Bloomington Mendota Heights Eagan Eagan Bumsville Inver Grove Heights St. Louis Park FAA Technical Advisor MAC DH� (new member next month) 2. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the February 25, 1997 meeting were approved as distributed. Chairman Johnson added �perations Committee Meeting Update as an agenda item. � 3. Introduction of invited quests Receipt of Communications Chairman Johnson introduced Brian Simonson Service Center Manager of DHL Airways who is expected to become a new USER representative next month, which will allow Sunfish Lake to become a full member. A letter from the City of Minneapolis was received regarding new appointments and reappointments of their MASAC representatives. John Richter, Jim Serrin and Joe Lee will continue as representatives. Pamela Nelms was appointed as a new representative. Judith Dodge and Mike Teegardin will continue as altemates with Steve Minn as a new altemate. 4. Technical Advisor's Runwav Svstem Utilization Report and Complaint Summarv T�aci Erickson, Technical Advisor, presented the February 1997 Technical Advisors Report. The .highlights of the reports are as follows:. � Traci noted that the Ope�ations Summary Data is the FAA Airport Traffic Record which uses data reported directly from the FAA (form #7230-1). This information used to be calculated using a myriad of sources. She noted that the counts will be slightly higher than the ANOMS counts because military counts are not filtered out of the FAA data. � Corridor usage is up during nighttime hours. � The total number of nighttime carrier jet operations is still up. Fo�ty-two percent of the nighttime flights occurred befinreen 11:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. John Richter, Minneapolis, made the suggestion that the noise abatement officers at MSP should be required to live in aircraft noise affected areas. Dawn Weitzel, Richfield, asked staff if it would be possible to get the Technical Advisor's Report at least one day before the regular meetings. Traci Erickson, Technical Advisor, said she would look into the possibility. Traci Ericicson, Technical Advisor, told the council about a public meeting being held at the Thundeirbird Hotel on May 13`h by the Federal Interagency on Aviation Noise (FICAN) in conjunciion with the AAAE convention. FICAN's purpose is to provide information to the public on aviation noise research projects conducted by federal agencies and to solicit input from the general public and technical community regarding the direction of federal researchers and to share research goals and resu{ts. 2 C , There wiil be two sessions. The first session will be held from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. and wiil cover technical issues, including noise reduction technologies and noise modeling issues. The second session will be held 6 p.m.-9 p.m. and will be about Aviation Noise Affects, Land Use Compatibility and public information p�ograms. Each MASAC member will be receiving information about the meeting in the mail. Jim Semn, Minneapolis, brougHt up the issue of Stage III aircraft. He was concemed that the percentage of Stage III aircraft is only at 54%. He wondered if the ai�lines would be able to get to 100% Stage III by December 31, 1999. Chairman Johnson pointed out that all airlines are required by federal law to comply. No ai�iines have been granted a waiver. It was pointed out that there wrill be a rapid increase in the percentage of Stage III aircraft being used over the next three years. Jennifer Sayre, Northwest Airlines, said that for 1996 the rule was 65% of an airline's fleet had to be Stage I11 and for 1998 it is 75 %. The percentage in the Technical Advisor's report is the percentage of operations, not the percentage of the fleet. Jill Smith, Mendota Heights, asked if the percentage of Stage III operations fo� Northwest Airlines at MSP was the same as the percentage of their overall Stage III fleet. Jennifer Sayre, NWA, said that the number of Stage I11 operations at MSP is about 60%, slightly lower than the approximately 65% Stage III fleet. Jan DelCalzo said she believed the other airlines' fleets were better than NWA's in regards to Stage III aircraft. Chairman Johnson, Traci Erickson and Jennifer Sayre disagreed. They said, for instance, that SunCountry Airlines are mainly Stage II. Jennifer Sayre, NWA, said that NWA's March schedule at MSP for this year was scheduled to be at 59% Stage III operations. She also mentioned that NWA has agreed with MAC never to backslide on the number of annual Stage III operations from one year to the next. Chairman Johnson asked Jennifer Sayre how many DC9's at NWA were hushed now. Jennifer Sayre said that approximately 85 were hushed. She said NWA shows a huge acceleration in their Stage I11 fleet in the next few years. Projections show NWA at 85% Stage III at the end of 1998 where the rules on(y mandate 75%. Jill Smith, Mendota Heights, asked how NWA wiil meet the Stage III rules; with hush-kifting or buying new aircraft. Jennifer Sayre, NWA, said it is a mixture but that NWA is a large DC-9 operator: She said she could get the specific information and get back to MASAC at a later meeting. Jennifer Sayre, NWA, said that NWA has also pledged to limit the annual use of Stage II aircraft at MSP to no more than the aggregate domestic system usage. John Richter, Minneapolis, asked if staff could give a report regarding SunCountry's Stage III usage. Traci Ericfcson, Technical Advisor, said she could get information for the next meeting. � ; 3 5. State of the MAC Report — Jeff Hamiel, Executive Directo� Jeff Hamiel, Executive Directo� of the MAC, listed 5 items he would discuss. They included: 1. Federal Funding 2. City of Richfield negotiations 3. Stage III Fleet Compliance 4. Construction Plans 5. MAC Strategic Plan Processes Federal Fundinq Mr. Hamiel stated that in the last few months he has been in Washington, D.C. on three � occasions trying to convince the Minnesota Congressional Delegation that the cutting back of federal funding programs for airports is a mistake. . He said at MSP the real concem for federal funding is to support the home insulation and noise abatement programs. A majority of fede�al funds go to environmental mitigation programs, a large part of it being the home insulation program. The ACI and AAAE went to congress last year asking for $1.67 billion to sustain the cuRent leve! of funding. Congress came back with a$1.45 billion funding level, which cut their request by several million dollars. The Administration then came back with a$1.0 billion funding level, which congress looks like it will adopt. Mr. Hamiel said that both the airports and the FAA will be severely penalized if it passes. Mr. Hamiel said federal funding was important to MSP because a significant part of the noise abatement funding comes from federal funding. He said the entire federal authorization for noise abatement programs for 1997 is $20 million. He said MAC is extremely bothered by ( this because for years MAC has paid into the aviation trust fund through ticket tax and waybill fares so that other airports could use the funds for noise abatement programs. Now that MSP nesds funding, it is no longer there. He said MAC has committed itself to the community to fund the noise abatement programs. The commission is now looking at how to recover $20 —$30 million in MAC funds in the event that federal funds totally disappear. He said it looks like for the first time the MAC will have to issue revenue bonds for certain programs. Mr. Hamiel said the bottom line is that federal dollars are declining while spending will need to increase. He also mentioned that the decision to insulate out to the 60 Ldn has prompted every airport in the U.S. to communicate their dissatisiaction with this decision. Mr. Hamiel said he believes MSP is the most aggressive airport in the US and probably the wo�ld when it comes to environmental planning and expenditure of public funds for environmental purposes. Citv of Richfield Ne4otiations Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director and Jim Prosser, City Manager of Richfield, have been meeting to work out a plan to accommodate Richfield after MAC gave the City the 4 � � required 18-month notice for taking back the goif course, �ballfields and gardens. He said the City of Richfield initiated a lawsuit against the MAC because MAC had not completed the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the North/South Runway. MAC's interpretation of the agreement was that during the 18-month period the EIS would be completed, go through a public hearing process and decisions made. Waiting until the EIS was complete would put the project off for 1 to 1%Z years. � Mr. Hamiel said it appears that an agreement has been reached whereby the MAC will attempt to delay taking any of the properties that are currently being used by the city until those prope�ties are needed for specific airport construction. This includes the ballfields, the golf course and the gardens. Mr. Hamiel said, without seeing the actual agreement, Nigel Finney has told him that the gardens would be relocated to other locations around the airport and that negotiations to move the ballfields and possibly putting in a driving range are in the works. MAC would also help the city to identify property in Richfield for a new golf course. M.r. Hamiel said the most significant aspect of this agreement would be that if a fairway has to be dug up for construction purposes, it would not be closed for good� but would be covered back over for continued use. This means the city could continue to use the golf course for more than 18 months. � ' Mr. Hamiel said negotiations with the City of Minneapolis are continuing regarding the construction of a third parallel runway. The city wants a 50-year guarantee of no construcfion. Mr. Hamiel said it would not be good public policy to make a binding agreement for a 50-year period. The MAC has offered to guarantee no construction through the year 2020 with two 10 year options that would be renewable to extend it another 20 years with a"look-see" at the � years 2020 and 2030. This offer was not acceptable to the City. MAC will be continuing . negotiations. Staae III Fleet Compliance Mr. Hamiel reiterated that the aiirport's Stage I11 operations are at 54% and NWA's Stage III operations are at 59%. Mr. Hamiel noted that as an interior airport, much like St. Louis, Kansas City, and DFW, this airport is serviced mainly by narrow-body, Stage II, 727's and DC9's. As a result, MSP does not have the higher Stage III compliance like one sees on the coasts, which have more wide-body aircraft. He said MSP will see a dramatic acceleration in NWA's Stage III compliance. He said he also believes NWA will be in full compliance before the December 31, 1999 deadline. He said John Dasbury of NWA also told him they would not be asking for a waiver. Mr. Hamiel noted that NWA had just announced the order of additional Airbus 330 airplanes and 320's, which are all Stage 111 aircraft. Mr. Hamiel went on to discuss some criticism MAC has experienced regarding MSP's non- competitive airiine environment. He said that NWA now operates 80% to 82% of the fleet that serves this area. As a result, NWA basically dominates and controls the pricing structures. He said most of the airiines that could be invited to MSP, except for Southwest, operate Stage II aircraft. In essence, more competition would drive prices down but increase the Stage II aircraft ope�ations. Mr. Hamiel said that he believes Stage III fleet compliance should be the first priority and any airline that does not comply should not be permitted to fly from MSP. i� j � 5 John Richter, Minneapolis, asked if the airlines with few or no Stage III aircraft have a schedule. Mr. Hamiel said they do but do not have the financial resources to comply and are , waiting until the last possible minute. Jim Semn, Minneapolis, asked if MAC was in negotiations with Southwest Ai�lines. Mr. ( Hamiel said for the past 6 years he has been trying to get Southwest to come to MSP. Mr. Hamiel said, in his opinion, Southwest would not come to MSP because they do not want to take on NWA in their home territory. He said he had just spent $32,000 to put together a proposal to Southwest Airlines, a$15,000 proposal for Midwest Express and a$20,000 proposal for Westem Pacific. He also mentioned that the Green Concourse will have additional gates added on to it, which will be reserved for MAC's use so that any competitor could begin operating very quickly. Construction Plans Mr. Hamiel said construction of an additional 10-12 gates on the end of the Green Concourse is being planned. MAC is also modifying the end of the Gold Concourse to accommodate three more gates. In order to accommodate passengers who arrive at the end of either concourse and need to get to the opposite concourse, a connector between the ends of the concourses is being planned. Additional people movers will also be added for passenger convenience. ' Mr. Hamiel also explained parking lot modifications that are being planned to provide for an additional 6,000-?,000 parking spaces. Mr. Hamiel said the North/South runway will require relocation of the air freight forwarding facilities, the Mesaba and SunCountry hangars, and the Federal Express cargo handling facility. Preliminary construction would begin in 1998 and be completed by 2003. For this ( project to be completed, MAC will have to acquire and remove the Doubletree Grand Hotel, the Sheraton Hotel, the Excellnn and the Amoco Service Station. MAC has already worked to stop new construction and is working with investors to stop any planned construction. Mr. Hamiel said this runway would increase MSP's capacity by more than 25%. Mr. Hamiel said the MAC is also working with the City of Richfield regarding a commercial buffer on the Richfield side of Cedar Avenue that would accommodate some noise attenuation because the North/South runway would then be closer to Richfield. The airport side may also have a commercial buffer. Mr. Hamiel updated the council on the reconstruction of the South Parallel runway. He said NWA had asked for a delay until 2003 so that they could train pilots to fly off the shortened runway and modify their schedules. The Commission voted to postpone it only one year. He said each end of the runway would be reconstructed over two construction seasons. The mid- section would be reconstructed after the North/South Runway was completed. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Hamiel if the MAC would be able to acquire any of the military p�operty on the North side of the airport. Mr. Hamiel said that in order to build a third parallel runway, this property would have to be acquired and relocated. He also said the noise impact 6 � on South Minneapolis and Mendota Heights makes the construction of a third parallel runway unacceptable to these communities. Jim Semn, Minneapolis, asked that if it was unacceptable, why wouldn't the MAC agree to a 50-year contract. Mr. Hamiel said he did not believe it would not be a responsible decision for a public agency to make. He said 50 years is a long time considering the possible advancements in technology that may take place in that time. MAC StrateQic Plan Processes Mr. Hamiel explained the MAC's strategic plan process. He said one of the five principles of the organization outlined in the document is, "To be respectful of our community and the environment." This leads to the values of the organization, one of which is, "We are responsive to the environmental concems of the community, we demonstrate leadership in sound environmental management, we promote open and honest communication about environmental concems, and we use our expertise fo assist in resolving public environmental issues.° Which in tum leads to the st�ategic goal of, " To continue our leadership in environmental mitigation." Mr. Hamiel then ente�tained questions from the council. John Richter, Minneapolis, asked abowt the report to the legislature regarding the number of operations at MSP and othe� issues. He asked whether the number of operations had changed and mentioned that he couldn't get a copy from tlie legislature. Mr. Hamiel said he would get a copy sent to him in draft form. � Mr. Hamiel said the airport experienced continued .growth over the past year - an increase in operations of 8'/Z % to 9%. He said what was told to the MAC and to the community was an �' � increase of 1'/z % to 2%. This forecast was published four years ago. MSP is currently at - the published 2005 level. He �aid MSP is currently just below the high forecast. Jim Serrin, Minneapolis, stated his concem that the Minnesota Legislature was not given accurate information when they voted to keep the airport at the present location. Mr. Hamiel said he told the legislature that the forcasted percentages were four years old. Jim Serrin said the MAC should have known the percentages were low based on the growth between 1992 and � 1996 and represented this to the legislature. Mr. Hamiel responded that the past years growth is very near the high forecast percentage based on Northwest Airiines experiencing a healthy recovery. Manny Camilon, St. �ouis Park, asked about the buffer zone planned for Cedar Avenue on the airport and Richfield sides. Mr. Hamiel said that it is possible that new hangars and air freight facilities would be built along the airport side. Mr. Hamiel said that the land on the Richfield side of Cedar Avenue would not be acquired, but the MAC would help the city modify the land for commercial use. Mr. Camilon also asked about the Stage II aircraft that will be inevitably left over. Mr. Hamiel said that many will be sold to third-wo�id countries. Dawn Weitzel, Richfield, wanted to clarify that the�e was more to the lease negotiations with Richfield than what was represented. Mr: Hamiel said that he had simplified the agreement �� j 7 . �. r C � n �, C� 1 -.}�, �tili�r�teapolis /St. Pacc! Int�rnativfial:tirport ----,� �� a�, .b1(�.�'TNLY'.6tEETL�'G - .bletrupulitair rlircraft Sound ,-ihateme�tt Cvuncil t•n�n.,,uu, Kubert P..luhavm �� • c,�,,,�„��„� Th�xna+ Huee Tr�Anucd �i�i�r�nr iraci F.rickvm 1� nn¢ Srrnrurr: }telicca ticm rt�rt+ki �1vn.�rnr Fiprr�v: Brian Ratcv irr �rtnuperf A.c.��x'rtrtwn. Paul 1tc<.raw alPa: Charles w. Cum Jr. Cirr af'Blurrinmltnn: Peunna Lee �'ern µ'ilmx Cin� nf Burnaz•iUr: ' ea eb�� c;rc ,�i F.�,ew,: Tnm Eppn Ci�r al lm�rrGrm•e Hnialus: Daie Hammons Cin� ��% .Nrnd�rra Nri¢lus: Jill timith Ci�v a/' Ninnrup��lis: Jemes B. Serrio John Rlc6ter Joe Lee Judltb Dodge Ci�ca(Rirh(ield: � Ki%tal Stokes Dewn Weitzel Cin� a(A. Lrrois Park: Rnbert Adrews Ci�ra(Sr. Paul: C..l'rntt Bunin TMmas H. HueR Carol Ann :NeCulre Drlra.��r Lnrs lnc•.: Rich Kldwell Frdrruf Etpne.c: o� o�ao� Frdrrul Ai�iutian .-IJnrmistnman: Bruce Wagoner Roneid f.lrub .NAC Stu/j Dick Keinz NB.1.1: Ro6ert P. Johavn .41rsulw,Vnnhwrst .4idink: Daniel S6eehou .Nrlrnpulitan Airn��rts Cummt.rsuxt: Canmigbner Altoo C.�per .N�Y.-iv.Vmi��.ud Guart7: Hqjor Roy J. Shetka .V ( � IT�1 N'f.11.i 1 /�111l5: >tark 5almeo Jennihr tiuyrs Sc Puul Chwnhrr n%Cnmmercr: Craig Wruck � Sun Cuantn�.iirlinrr: Dalc IC�riva Cnurd .i�rlinr.s lnr.: siu Yv,u� U�urrd Prtrcrl Srn•�cr.• 5teve Walker C.S..��rFnrt�r Rrsrn�r: Captaln Dnvfd .!, Cerken I i Ntetropolitan Airports Commission Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � 1�tetropolitan .�irports Commission Declaration of Purposes l.) Promote publir welFare and national security: szrve public interest. com�enience. and nec�ssity; promote air naviaation and transportation, international, national, state. and local, in and throu�h this state: promote the efficient, safe, and economiraf handlinv of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and intemational programs of air transportation: and to those ends to develop the fu(1 potentialities of the metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and [o correlate [hat area with al! aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area: ?.� Assure the residents of the metropotitan area oF the minimum environmental impact from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement, control of airport area land use, and other protective measures; and 3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental poticies and minimize the public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around ai�ports. Ntetropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Statement of Purpose This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities adjoining Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport - Wold-Chamberlain Field, a public airport in the Count}r of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport: through study and evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the aileviation of the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the affected communities, their affected residenCs, and the users of the airport respecting the problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions initiated and taken to alleviate the problem. Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Representation The membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations, associations and governmental badies which by reason of their statutory authority and responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users, have a direct interest in the operation of the aiipoct. Such members will be called User Representatives and Pubtic Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and Public Representatives shatl at all times be equat in number. The Airport 24-hour Noise Hottine is 726-94!l. Comp[aints to the hotline do not result in changes in Airpnrr activint but provide a public sounding board and airport information oudet. The hodine is stat�'ed du�ing business hours. Monda}� - Fridai: This report is prepared and printed in house by Chad Leqve. ANSP Technician Questions or comments may be directed to: MAC - Aviation Noise & Satellite Proeram Minneapo(is / St. Paul [nternational Airport 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis. ;�tN 55�350 Tef: (6I3) 735-633 (, Fax: (613) 725-6310 r1N3P Home Page: http://www.macavsat.org t' C i �� i �i Operations and Complaint Summary 1 � � ��) Operations Summary - All Aircraft .....................................................................................1 MSP March Fleet Mix Percentage .......................................................................................1 Airport March Complaint Summary ....................................................................................1 March Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office .............................................:........1 Minneapolis - St. Palcl International Airport Complaint Summary 2 ComplaintSummary by City ...............................................................................................2 Available Time,for Rr�nway Use 3 � � � Tower Log Reports - All Hours ...........................................................................................3 Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours ................................................................................3 AllOperatz'ons 4 Runway Use Report March 199'7 .....................................................................................:...4 Carrier Jet Operations S Runway Use Report March 1997 .........................................................................................5 Nightt�'me - A.11 Oper-atz'ons 6 Runway Use Report March 1997 .........................................................................................6 Nig�htt�°me Ca�ier Jet Operations 7 . Runway Use Report March 1997 ......................................:..................................................7 Carrier Jet Operations by 7'ype 8 Aarcra, ft Identi, fier and Description Table 9 Runway Use - Day/Night Periods - All Operations 10 DaytimeHours ...................................................................................................................10 Community Ove�flight.�4nalysis �1 � i Camer Jet Operations - All Hours .........................................................................:........... I 1 � Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (1 l pm 6 am) .............................................................11 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Remote Mofiitoring Site Loccctiotis 12 Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 13 Count of Arrival Aircraft I�toise Events for Each RiVIT ............. C'arrier Jet d�epartccre Relczted Noise Events 14 0 �,. .................................13 � ' Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ...........................:....................1� Ten Loacdest Aircraft Norse Ev.ents Idertta aed Ten Loicdest Aircraft Noise Events Identi ied Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identi ied Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identa ied Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identi ied Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identa�ed IS 16 17 IS 19 20 Flight Track Base Map 21 '� rt Noise and O erations Monitoring System Flaght Tracks 22�, Ai po p Carrier Jet Operations - March 1997 .................................................................................22 Airport Noase and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 23 Carrier Jet Operations - March 1997 ................•................................................................23 �lirport 1Voise and Operations Monitoring ►System Flight Tracks 24 Carrier Jet Operations - March 1997 ................................................................................ 24 Arrport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 25 Cazrier Jet Operations - March 1997 ................:............................................................... 25 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aarcraft Ldn dB(A) Analysis of Aarcraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn d�(A) Aviation Noise & Sateltite Programs � 26 FxI � i' ; ; ; �ICtI�i ��n.�t:�.lu .y:�. � �i �� •i��u�:��. �i� Operations and Complaint Summary l�Iarch 1997 Operations Summary - All Aircraft Runway Arrival % Use Departure °Io Use p..�. ??5 l.�n� l8 0. l�/� ?? 1l9 0.8"�� 1030 ' 7.9�I� Il 5890 39.7�7� 5710 -�3.9�1� ?9 8602 58.0�?c 6262 �8. t% i�ISP MarchFleet �Iix Percentage Scheduled Scheduled ANOMS ANOMS Stage l� 1997 Count 1996 Count 1997 Stage 2 53.6�Ie 40.5�Ic 52.Z°lo �6.2% Stage 3 46.��70 59.��Ic �7.8�Io 53.8�Io Airport MarchComplaint Summary Airport . � 1996 1997 MSP 615 916 Airlake 0 0 Anoka t 0 Crystal 0 1 Flying Cloud 1 3 Lake Elmo 0 0 St. Paul 7 � Misc. l 0 TOTAL 625 920 March Average Daily Operations Summary - FAA Airport Tra#iic Record Aviation Noise & Satetlite Programs Pag� 1 �1.... �('��i::i1 �.� . .i�t�: .. � �. `Iinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Sur�lmar�� Iarch 1997 � Compl�tint Summary b�• Cit�� City Arrival Departure Total Percentage Apple Valley 0� 2 2 0.2% Arden Hiils 0 3 3 0.390 Bloominaton 1 15 l6 1.8�Io Burnsville 0 18 l8 2.090 Eagan 73 19 9? 10.4% Eden Prairie 3 6 9 1.0% Edina 0 � ' 4 O.S�Io Inver Grove Heights 5 253 258 29.O�Io � Lakeville 0 1 1 0.1% Mendota Heights 14 22 36 4.190 Minneapolis 127 190 • 317 35.7% New Brighton 0 1 1 0.1% Prior Lake 0 3 3� 0.3% Richfield 4 43 47 5.3°Io . South St.Paul . 0 1 1 0.1% St.Anthony 0 1 1 0.1% � St.Louis Park 16 7 23 2.6% St.Paul 25 6 3 l 3.5% Sunfish Lake 2 24 26 2.9% Total 270 619 889 100% Time of Day .. Nature of Complaint Time Total Nature of Complaint Total 00:00 - 05:59 38 Excessive Noise 811 06:00 - 06:59 18 Early/Late 70 07:00 - 11:59 206 Low Flying 2 12:00 - 15:59 $7 Structural Disturbance 4 16:00 - 19:59 212 Helicopter 1 20:00 - 2�:59 204 Ground Noise 27 22:00 - 22:59 l07 Engine Run-up 0 23:00 - 23:59 4� Frequency 1 Total 916 Total 916 Paae ? � Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � . `�c):R��t�l;i.lfl .�l(F��CI� L��lii(ii!�tii!tl Availabte Time for Run�vay Use To��er Log Reports - Nlarch 1997 . :�tl Hours 2% 3�% 1% 28% - �� \ - ,__._,22 � 11 - �u�r _.�� - ' ��✓°�� ,� ; 3% 3% Nighttime Hours 1% 3% r' . , .: �, , � g% � Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pase 3 `�::i��C`��!t.lfl �i(;.^��!'I� Cil�ilflll��ll�(1 All (Jperations Runway Use Report l�'Iarch 1 97 0.1 % � ArrivaV March March Runway � arture Count Percentage 1996 Count 1996 P Percentage 04 A 225 1.5°Io 239 . 1.3% 11 L A 294$ 19.9% 2911 15.4% � 11 R A 2942 19.8% 3079 16.3% 22 A 119 0.8% 169 0.9°Io 29L A 46$8 31.6% 6534 34.5% 29R A 3914 26.4% 5974 31.6% Total Arr. 14836 100 °Io 18906 100 °I'o 04 D 18 0.1 % l 43 0. 8% 11 L D 2606 20.0% 2891 15.7% 11 R D 3104 23.9% 2954 16.1 % 22 p 1030 7.9% 607 3.3°Io 29L D 3536 27.2% 6348 34.5% 29R D 2726 20.9% 5439 29.6% Total Dep. 13020 � 100% 18382 100% Note: AK! � ctaru m�sstng for a cravs . p;�o� :� Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Carrier Jet Operations � i2un�vay Use Report IVlarch 1 97 Q.1 % 46.6% 0.9% 39.9% � :�ICUi��t'iii.iil .-1i f��l':•l_��If1111,��iU11 �.,, March Runway �pa�� Count Percentage 1996 Count 1996 Percentage 04 A 139 1.5% 108 0.9% • 11 L A 1851 19.6% 1876 15.2% 11 R A 1912 20.3% 1940 15.7% 22 A 84 0.9% 103 0.8% 29L A 2903 30.8% 4264 34.5% 29R A 2531 26.9% 4073 32.9%a Total Arr. 9420 100% 12364 100% 04 D 4 0.1 % 36 0.3% 11 L D 1664 19.0% 1817 15.1 % 11 R D 2176 24.9% , 1995 16.6% 22 D 826 9.4% 425 3.5% 29L D 2354 26.9% 4360 36.3% 29R D 1721 19.7% 3393 28.2% Total Dep. 8745 100% 12026 100% Nvte: ARTS ciuta mising for t� days Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page � `1:'[R�[4��1(.1(1 �lC��fi� i, t�fil!??1..��(? �iighttir�1e - �11 Operations Run��•ay Use �Zeport 1�Iarch 1 97 1.3% 22.1 % 10.3 °I 9.�% -----`-_ ---- .� - , � _�-._. :�--_-.?Z �. 11' ` �� _�.\-, _ ,��'�� v ��,v� �� r i �� `;. `;� �.�.\ ,�� _ 1• 11.3 °�- 13.6 0 9 v ;n � � 68.6% � �'/� 63.0% 1� March March Runway ArrivaV Count Percentage 1996 Count 1� Departure Percentage 04 A 86 11.3% 57 8.I% 11 L A 18 2.4% 28 4.0% 11 R A 56 7.4% 79 11.2°10 2? A 78 10.3% 20 2.8% . 29L, A 410 54.2% 364 � 51.7% 29R A 109 14.4% 156 22.2% Total Arr. 757 100°Io 704 100°% 04 p 4 1.3% 47 14.9% 11L D 55 17.3°Io 40 12.7% 11 R D� 145 45.7% 78 24•7°ia 22 p 43 13.6% 44 13.9% 29L D 45 14.2% 70 22.1% ?9R D 25 7.9°Io 37 11.7% Total Dep. 317 100% 316 100% Note.• AX 1 J ciata m�sstng jvr a crati•s Page 6 Aviation.Noise & Satetlite Programs �' ` 0 0 �1�[rc�poli[:zn .�irpu�:, Cumm�.,iun Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Runway Use Report March 1 97 0.5 °Io . � 16Z% 9.2% �� o.s% ' 66.5% � � March Runway �p�� Count Percentage 1996 Count l� Percentage 04 A 51 8.7% 33 6.1% 11 L A 14 2.4% 20 3.7% 11R � A 40 6.8% 48 8.8% 22 A 66 11.3% 17 3.1% 29L A 318 54.4% 301 55.2% 29R A 96 16.4% 126 23.1% Total Arr. 585 100% 545 100% 04 D 1 0.5% 2 1.3% 11 L D 36 19.5% 21 14.0% 11 R D 87 47.0% 45 30.0% 22 D 31 16.8% 26 17.3% 29L D 20 10.8% 37 24.7% 29R D 10 5.4% 19 12.7% Total Dep. 185 100% 150 100% Note: A.RTS data missing for 8 days Aviation IVoise & Satellite Programs Page 7 �I�tn�c��u�.:�� -1;rt��r:,��T;nu..;,�� Page 8 Carrier Jet Operations b�� Type l��Iarch 1997 Aircraft Type Count Percentage B 707 0 0.0�7c B7?7H 251 1.-�9c B733/�/5 572 ' 3.1% B747 78 0.4cIo B7�F 29 0.2% B757 1830 10.1% B767 2 0.0% B A46 0 0.0% CL65 285 1.6% DA10 � 0 0.0% DC LO 909 5.0% DC87 79 0.4% DC9H 2215 12.2% EA30 12 0.1% EA31 31 0.2% EA32 1720 9.5% FK10 734 4.0% L1011 127 0.7% MD 11 0 0.0% MD80 $9l 4.9% BA10 14 0.1% ' BA t 1 1 0.0% � B727 2235 12.3°% B737 1230 6.8% DCS 55 0.3% DC9 4865 26.7% FK28 0 0.0% Total 1'8165 100% Note: ARTS data missing for 8 ctcr}•s ' Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs 53.8 % Stage III _�. s 46.2 % Stage II �I.:.i� �4'•„i...;:: 1�lF•��.,� l.��ILCt;��i(�i Aircraft Identifier and DescriptionTah�e Identifier Aircraft Description 8707 BOEItiG 707 B7�7 ' BOEING 7�7 B737H BOEING 7?7 - HliSH KIT B733/-�/5 BOEING 737-300%�00/500 B737 BOEING 737 l00/200 SERIES B7:}7 BOEING 7-�7 B74F BOEIIVG 747 FREIGHTER B757 BOEING 757 ' B767 BOEING 767 BA10 BRITISH AEROSPACE l35 BA 11 BRITISH AEROSPACE t(( BA4f BRITISH AEROSP.ACE l46 CL6a CAIVADAIR 650 DAlO FALCON 10 pC �p MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10 DC8 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 DC87 MCD01�tNELL DOUGLAS DC8 70-SERIES RE ,DC9 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC4 DC9H MCDOIYNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT EA30 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300 EA3l AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A310 EA32 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320 FK l0 FOKKER 100 FK2� FOKKER F?7 (PROP) FK28 . FOKKER F28 L lO l l LOCKHEED TRISTAR L l0 (1 MD 1 I MCDO[�1NELL DOUGLAS DC 1 l MD80 MCDONI�TELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES SW3 SWEARINGEN METROLINER 3 SW4 SWEARII�IGEN METROLII�fER 4 SF34 SAAB 340 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa�e 9 `�C:�ti��ili[.tf? .-iti��`��t.� l ��(ili;:� � „�i: Run��a�� LTse - lDay�I�iight Periods - All Operations 1�Iinneapolis - St. Paut International Airport i�Iarch 1997 Da��time Hours Runw�ay Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Total Day Name Day Use Day Use 0�1 l� 0.1% t39 1.09c 153 11 L 2551 20.1 °Io 2930 20.89c 5481 � 11 R 2959 23.3% 2886 20.5�Ic 5845 22 987 7.8% 41 0.390 102$ 29L 3491 27.5% 4278 30.4�Ic 7769 29R 2701 21.2% 3805 . 27.0% 6506 Total 12703 100% 14079 100% 26782 � Nighttime Hours Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Name Night Use Night Use Total Night 04 4 1.3% 86 11.3% 90 11L 55 17.3% 18 2.4% 73 11R 145 45.7% 56 7.4C/o 201 22 43 13.6% 78 10.3% 121 29L 45 14.2% 410 54.2% , 455 29 R 25 �.9% 109 l 4.4% 134 Total 317 100% 757 100% �1074 Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satel(ite Programs ��::..,.��,•��:.�� ,::��„�.. � . ,....., „ �, � Community Overflight �nalysis : 1�Iinneapotis - St. Paul International �irport i�Iarch 1997 Carrier Jet Operati<�ns - :�ll Hours Number Number Total Percent Number of Overflight Area Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations Arrivals Departures Operations Operations per 24 Hours Over So. Minneapolis/ 3763 -�075 7838 43.1 �Ic 3�0.8 No. Richfield Over So. F2ichfield/ 139 826 96� 5.3�Io 42.0 Bloomington ' Over St. Paul - 84 4 88 O.S�Io 3.8 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 5434 3841 9275 51.1% 403.3 Mendota Heights Total 18166 100% 789.9 Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (llpm - 6 am) Number Number Total Percent Number of Overflight Area Arrivals Departures Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations ( �) Operations Operations per 2 ours Over So. Minneapolis/ 54 30 84 10.9°Io 2.8 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 51 31 82 10.7�10 2.8 Bloomington Over St. Paul - 66 l 67 8.7°Io 2.3 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 414 123 537 69.7% 18.1 Mendota Heights Total 770 100% 26.0 Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa�e I f ��t..i �f'�,'ll:.iil �1: , '1 l.��li..... �� . Remote 1�Ionitoring Site Locations Airport Noise and Operations ��Ionitoring System q . _-__; —•✓'� -�_.�'�.,,�_1\�\�� _ � .:�,' i� �`-�=�'� . ,� ,- � ,�. , �\_�; � \ �, S-t---�aut % i � �' Minneapolis � �1 ��\ �, \ . / �' �` �, ��^ �\ , ;y� , . / , , � �� . - �_ • .,-_,� � , = ��a \ , _ �� a :' �� / �'�,� ` i ,� _c�� `� =3�. . /�. � .�\�:,a � '- `� i ,- `` � , � , _ ��4 v ., ,/ ` �� . � ' �%� \l\ �� `, ij� __ ' � _ � � \\ � ' -5!i�. � �\ . ' '� . =5i?5 • %/. '� - c ,t i �— \ = ` ?! ' -- ; . . � • ' �:. �' Mendota HeighUs � _ �� ; , � -��; ' i =s�,� � , % • / � '. ./ r; j � / . ,l��23'� � RiGhfield = s�'s � � . '� ,� ' ' "'$ 3 : �a .' =w� '; ,. � � \ : `� �� i�� • ' -.�.�Z' � _ l �� FI� �+ o . ' • ' J � c . • -� � • '� � � � /`�-^� ' % Inver Grove Heights :J ;-�. _ � n� 7 jN,�/ � 1'� ��,. '`'� ' i /�� .' / \a = 5 � � \� v � ` � � /'� Eagan/ , omington !J � �, ; �� • , �' � -�,, v ` �.�� C r c . �.../.� .. v V � �'� � J � � % s:�� J^ f /i `�) w r� � � ; Page 12 Aviation Nbise & Satellite Programs � �e �I�.��t��•��.,ai� ��f��..�, �r,��.,. ��i.i� Carrier Jet Arrival Retated Noise Events Nlarch 1997 Count of �rrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each EL�IT I2�ti1T Events Events Events Events � City Approximate Street Location �SdB >80dB >90dB >100dB t vtinneapolis Xer!ces Avenue &-� lst Street 8?0 56 ( � ? vtinneapolis Fremont Avenue &-�3rd Street 9l0 1l� 1 0 3 ivtinneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 983 �01 (0 0 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street IOOI 408 23 0 5 Minneapotis 12th Avenue & �8th Street 1098 598 95 6 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 1183 603 171 l4 7 Richtield Wentworth Avenue & 6�th Street � 180 8 0 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 143 10 1 0 9 St. Paul Sararoga Street & Hartford Avenue 67 39 6 0 !0 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 120 43 12 0 I 1 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 45 1 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton Screet & Rockwood Avenue 50 14 0 0 1, .--. 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 31 I 2 0 0 --� 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 4666 329 1 0 IS Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Leacington Avenue 692 20 0 0 l6 Eagan Avalon Avenue &�las Lane 4094 1019 9 0 17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 28 4 0 0 18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 90 21 l 0 19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 33 3 l 0 ?0 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 55 2 0� 0 21 [nver Grove Heiglits Bacbara Avenue & 67th Street 112 9 2 � 22 [nver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trai! 2213 39 0 0 Z3 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 1515 169 9 l ?4 Eaean Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 3098 60 l� � Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13 �i�trc��+��li[an -�,irp��rt, C��mmi��i��n Carrier Jet I)eparture Related i�T�ise Events Nlarch 1997 Count of Departure �ircraft �loise Events for Each R�IT i R1tiIT ' Events Events Events Events � City Approximate Street Locadon ��dB >80dB >90dB >100dB l Ytinneapolis Xerses Avenue &-�lst Street 87? 10� 0 0 2 ;�tinneapolis Fremont Avenue &-�3rd Street I358 3 l9 � 0 3 �tinneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue ?099 188 17 0 � Minneapolis Oakland Avenue &�9th Street ?8?2 554 � 6 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street �867 1777 527 -�3 6 Minneapolis ?Sth Avenue & 57th Street 5313 2090 1028 229 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 3320 9l8 115 � 8 Ntinneapolis Longfetlow Avenue &�3rd Street 657 75 9 0 9 St. Paut Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 23 2�: I 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 240 29:: 2 l 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 63 LO 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue l05 34 2 I 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court L?87 303 7 0 l� Eagan First Street & McKee Street 1905 498 61 ? t5 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 2025 403 43 0 t6 Eagan Avaton Avenue &�las Lane ?206 787 I50 4 17 Btoomington 84th Screet & 4th Avenue 264 37 ° 10 0 18 Richfield 75th Sueet & l7th Avenue 1926 491 183 l2 l9 Btoomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 793 327 8l 6 � 20 Richfield 75th Sireet & 3rd Avenue 864 7? l2 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbaza Avenue & 67th Street 742 115 2 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trai! l 120 240 2 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue ?867 729 310 18 24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 1456 249 16 0 Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Page l� Aviation i�loise & Satellite Pcograms r' N �l�[rup��lit,�n .�irp�,rt� C:�,rnr1�:,.;��n j Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified R�IT #1: Xer�ces �►ve. & �tlst St. vlinneapotis Date Time `�C �t� � Type Level 03/08/9713:36:?4 DC9 91.7 A 03/l�/9713:02:34 DC9 89.7 A 03/?0/9712:32:15 B727 89.4 D 03/Ol/97 (6:53:34 B727 89.0 D 03/29/9713:04:56 B747 88.7 D 03/01/97 20:55:52 B727- 88.6 D 03/O L/97 19:53:40 B727 88.3 D 03/22/97 9:33:34 DC9 87.6 D 03/29/97 l3: i 7:47 DC9 87.5 D 03/01/9711:01:47 B727 87.2 D RMT #3: W. Elmwood S� & Belmont Ave. Minneapolis Date Time Ty� Max � Levet 03/Ol/9710:00:52 B727 98.8 D 03/19/97 ( i:37:51 DC9 97.6 D 03/Ol/97 20:49:14 B727 97.5 D 03/19/9712:30:32 B757 96.0 D 03/22/97 20:24:36 B727 96.0 D 03/29/97 8:20:20 DC9 95.8 D 03/25/9714:55:51 DC9 95.4 A 03/17/9710:14:15 B727 95.2 D 03/31/97 9:44:18 B727 94.9 A 03/29/9719:01:23 B727 93.7 D R:biT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. vlinneapolis Date Time �C Max � Type Level 03/24/97 8.:40:13 B7?7 95.5 A 03/30/9713:13:�9 B747 93.5 D 03/22/97 9:34:19 B727 92.9 D 03/29/97 9:38:59 B727 91.9 D 03/Ol/9712:23:05' B737 90.6 D 03/Ot/97 L9:53:36 8727 90.5 D 03/ll/9713:08:03 B727 90.3 D 03/15/9710:29:49 DC9 89.9 D 03/25/9719:13:47 B727 89.7 D 03/24/97 8:47:49 B727 89.6 A R1�1T #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St. Minneapolis Date 15me �C M� � '1`ype Level 03/22/97 9:33:47 B727 102Z D 03/29/9710:09:30 B727 101.2 D 03/19/979:36:04 B737 100.9 D 03/22/9712:24:51 B727 100.5 D 03/29l97 20:22:28 B727 100.4 D 03/29/97 9:38:20 B727 100.3 D 03l25/97 9:46:48 B727 99.9 D 03/29/9712:10:43 B727 99.9 D 03/30/97 9:5�1:34 DC9 98.8 D 03/17/979:33:31 B727 97.4 D Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page t � �l�[rc,pi�Il[1(? .�If��ft� (.'„mrni••i�`Il Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified Rti1T #�: 12th Ave. & �8th St. �Iinneapolis Date Time �C Max � Type Level 03/t 1/97 9:46:58 B727 107.1 D 03/22/97 9:39:47 B727 106.3 D 03/21/97 20:09:57 B727 104.8 D 03/29/97.12:03:56 $727 104.7 D 03/2?/97 8:3?:35 B727 104.5 D 03/t4/97 7:17:45 B�27 104.3 D 03/29/9715:13:12 B727 104.2 D 03%30/9713:34:04 DC9 L04.1 D 03/29/9716:55:30 B727 104.0 D 03/25/9719:51�:23 B727 102.7 D RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St Richfield Date Time Ty� Ma�e � Level 03/25/97 9:22:18 DC9 103.0 D 03/10/9715:48:30 B727 101.3 D 03/O1/9713:59:30 B727 l01.2 D 03/29/97 0: t4:07 B727 101.0 D' 03/Ol/9712:11:10 B727 99.5 D 03/29/97 12:36:21 DC 10 99.4 D 03/21/9� 9:19:28 B727. 99.3 D 03/21/9716:02:55 B727 99.1 D 03/01/9713:39:43 B727 98.� - D 03/2?/97 L2:08:15 8727 98.5 D FLtiIT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St. �tinneapolis Date Time �e Level � 03/ 19/97 9:35:28 B727 L 10. t D 03/29/9710:09:12 B727 t08.5 D 03/19/97 9:43:00 B727 108. t D 03/29/97 9:38:01 B727 108.1 D 03/19/97 8:16:�8 B737 107.6 D 03/08/97 17:10:45 8727 l07.5 ' D 03/13/9712:10:�9 B�27 l07.4 D 03/22f9713:19:12 B727 l07.2 D 03/02/9714:43:17 DC9 107.0 D 03/19/9712:29:36 B757 106.9 D RMT #8: Longfeilow Ave. & 43rd St. Minneapolis Date Time � M� A/D Level 03/19/97 7:39:24 B727 98.5 D 03/19/9716:23:59 B727 95.8 D 03/2l/97 L 1:43:00 DC9 95.1 D 03/t5/97 20:3 t:54 B727 943 D 03/03/9712:25:04 B727 94.1 D 03/21/97 7:26:37 DC9 94. L D 03/29/97 8:01:48 DC9 93.0 D 03/10/97 9:50:53 B727 91.4 A 03/17/97 7:12:33 B727 90.5 D 03/29/97 9:13:48 DC9 90.4 D Note: ARTS data missing for 8 days Page 16 Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs `�C(�t)��ll(.lfl �t('[`��('i> �.i?ttiRll��itt(� Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 12�tiIT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford :��•e. St. Paul Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/l6/97 ?3:?2:36 B727 9�.6 A 03/?9/97 (3:05:?3 B747 94.2 D 03/31/97 ?3:�?:�2 6727 94. t A 03/27/97 ?3:27:07 B7?7 92.9 A 03/17/97 0:06:49 B727 91.5 A 03/27/97 23:08:23 B727 91.3 A 03/Ol/97 �: I6:01 B727 90.� A 03/16/9713:12:31 B727 88.5 A 03/04/97 6:04:04 S W4 86.3 A 03/24/97 14:27:46 DC 10 85.8 A RMT #11: Finn S� & Scheffer Ave. S� Paul Date Time ,�� M� A/D Level 03/25/9713:35:50 DC9 89.2 D 03/18/9714:47:05 B747 88.9 D 03/23/97 6:28:43 DC9 88.1 D 03/21/97 6:03:42 DC9 87.4 D 03/25/9712:37:11 B727 86.6 D 03/02/97 5:49:20 DC9 86.3 D 03/07/97 9:14:04 DC9 85.4 D 03/27/9718:53:11 B727 83.8 D 03/ 16/97 7:39:37 ' DC9 83.5 D 03/17/97 5:36:38 DC9 83.3 D R�[T #10: [tasca �ve. & Bow�doin St. St. Paul Date Time �e L vel � 03/29/9713:04:�6 B7-t7 96.0 D 03/18/9714:-�6:�8 B747 � 95.9 D 03/27/97 ?3:?7:50 6727 94.8 A 03/01/97 5:36:50 DC t0 94.7 A 03/3l/97 23:53:34 B727 94.3 � A 03/O l/97 4:16:42 B727 942 A 03/ 16/97 �3:23:23 B 727 94.2 A 03/01/97 0:07:16 B727 93.4 A 03/27/97 23:09:04 B727 93.4 A 03/27/97 23:30:15 L 10 L 93. I A RMT #12: Alton S� & Rockwood Ave. St. Paul Date Time �C Max � Type Level 03/22/9� 13:32:56 DC9 t00.5 D 03/21/9710:02:33 DC9 99.2 D 03/27/97 20:31:29 8727 90.2 D 03/3l/9715:42:30 DH8 89.7 A 03/21/9712:41:15 LR55 89.� A 03/? 1/97 9:05:00 B73S 89.3 D 03/06/9719:58:53 DC9 88.7 D 03/06/97 20:52:11 DC9 88.6 D 03/3l/97 7:?0:04 B7?7 87.�F D 03/22/97 20:40:02 B7?7 87.2 D Nute: ARTS ctuta missing fvr 8 days Aviation Noise & Sate(lite Programs Paae 17 `(;.�cr,�c��litan .-��m„rt• CuRlfill�•;�m Ten Loudest Airera�t Noise E��ents Identified R�IT #13: Southeast End of �Iohican Court �Iendota Heights Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/?7/97 9:36:03 B737 94.6 D 03/27/97 20:�4:31 B727 93.4 D 03/OS/9716:28:�� B727 93.0 D 03/27/97 20:20: l6 B727 92.I D 03/13/9715:20:28 B727 91.4 D 03/27/97 22:29:?5 B727 9 L3 D 03/14/9715:33:32 B7?7 91.1 D 03/16/97 9:46:42 B727 91.1 D 03%31/97 5:51:04 B727 90.9 D 03/12/97 7:24:18 B727 89.7 A RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. Mendota �ieights Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/27/97 20: L9:52 B727 97.9 D 03/31/97 20:45:08 B727 97.4 D 03/13/97 8: t�:35 B727 97.2 D 0313 t/97 23:35:37 B727 96.9 D 03/31/97 20:15:33 B727 96.5 D 03/27/9� 7:�9:19 6727 .95.8 D 03/21/97 20:25:37 B727 953 D 03/25/97 20:00:27 B737 95.1 D 03/ t4/97 17:29:00 B727 94.9 D 03/21/97 ?0:27:26 DC9 94.9 D Page 18 R.tiIT #1-t: lst St. & �IcKee St. Eagan Date Time �C Maac � Type Level 03/31/97 15: t4:53 DC 10 100.3 D 03/27/97 9:24:17 B727 t00. t D 03/23/97 7:37:46 B727 99.9 D 03/08/9718:47:3� DC9 99.8 D . 03/08/9715:01:12 B7?7 98.1 D 03/24/97 8:48:50 B727 97.3 D 03/31/97 8:46:58 B727. 97.0 A 03/3l/9712:08:10 B727 97.0 D 03/25/9718:01:25 B727 95.� � D 03/25/97 6:09:28 B727 95.6 D RNIT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane Eagan Date �me A/C Max � . 'I`ype Levet 03/28/97 6:12:32 DC9 104.0 D 03/13/9718:18:16 B727 102.1 D 03/13/97 21:16:23 B7?7 101.3 D 03/08/9717:08:?5 B727 101.0 D 03/3l/9713:56:58 B737 99.6 D 03/18/97 9:07:47 B727 99.5 D 03/27/97 6:49:44 B737 99.2 D 03/24/9� 20:Q0: (8 B727 99.0 D 03/08/97 8:10:09 B7?7 98.9 D 03/13/971�:I0:03 B727 98.9 D Note: ARTS data missing for 8 ciays Aviation Noise & Satettite Programs (:, t, - ; �1..., �t��rli�`... \� 9.� \.� i...i.. �� Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified R�iT #17: 8-�th St. & �#th �.ve. Bloomington Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/l9/97 7:00:00 B737 97•7 D 03/2 U97 7:� (:38 B 727 96.5 D 03/Ol/97 6:27:04 B727 96.� D 03/? 1/97 18:�8:11 B727 96.0 D 03/09/97 7:34:21 B727 . 94.3 D 03/08/97 6:�i:53 6727 92.2 D 03/23/97 7:23:56 B72'7 92.2 D 03/l6/97 7:?7:56 B727 91.2 D 03/2J9711:48:28 B�27 90.9 D 03/19/97 9:51:22 B727 90.8 ' D R.�tiIT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th S� Bloomington Date Time ,�� M� A/D Level 03/29/97 8:32:54 B727 103.5 D 03/15/97 9:05:38 B72� 102.9 D 03/01/97 7:20:58 B727 102.$ D 03/29/97 7:d0:10 B727 101.8 D 03/30/97 6:33:52 B727 IOl.3 D 03/39/97 19:3 L•06 B727 L00.3 D 03/29/97 7:36:14 DC9 100.0 D 03/29/97 6:48:19 B727 99.9 D 03/0l/97 7:38:51 B727 99.8 D 03/20/97 6:11:16 B727 96.8 D R.�IT #18: 7�th St. & 17th �ve. Richfietd Date Time �e Level � 03/29/9717:-�(:10 B7Z7 10�.8 D 03/0?/9713:�0:50 B727 10�1.1 D 03/? t/97 13:40:32 B7�7 103.0 D 03/Il/9713:OO:18 B727 102.9 D 03/ I S/97 9:�6:13 B727 102.9 D 03/l9/9716:09:10 B727 102.6 D 03/02/97 6:36:04 B727 102.5 D 03/30/97 6:33:43 B727 102.0 D � 03/25/97 S:Q8:10 B727 101.8 D 03/08/97 7:09:24 B727 101.7 D Rl�IT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave. R.ichfield Date Time �e Level � 03/15/97 9:4b:30 B727 98.6 D 03111/9� 13:00:34 B7?7 97.9 D 03/15/97 21:25:49 B727 97.3 D 03/15/9712:43:06 B727 96.3 D 03/30/97 6:23:34 B727 94.7 D 03/19/9715:48:59 B727 93.7 D 03/19/9712:49:45 DC9 92.5 D 03/19/97 5:05:22 B727 93.5 D' ' 03/18/9714:32:19 DC9 93.4 D 03/02/97 7:14:08 B727 92.? D Note: ARTS cluta missing for 8 clays Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa�e ( 9 �t:cr,�s��,�,t.�:� �im��r�.��mm�,��n �'en Loudest �ircraft tioise Events Identifi�d R�IT #21: Barhara �,ve. & 67th St. In�'er Grove Heights Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/ f 0/97 9:-�-�:03 DC9 94.2 D 03/t-�/97 6:�?:11 DC9 91.2 A 03/IS/97 6:27:� t B757 91.0 A 03/16%97 6:�8:57 � B727 90.1 D 03/12/97 21:50:53 8727 89.8 A 03/13/97 5:?9:28 B727 893 D 03/31/97 7:12:23 B727 88.0 D 02/18/95 7:03:45 B727 87.6 D 03/24/9� 14:40:55 B�27 87.5 D 03/26/97 15:0 t:55 DC9 $7.5 D �R:�IT #22: Anne �Iarie Trail Inver Grove Heights Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/0 U97 7:54:5� B7?7 9l .0 D 03/26/97 9:57:02 B7?7 90.1 D 03/26/97 10:13:�8 B7?7 89.0 � D 03/15/9714:37:24 B7?7 88.7 D 03/l9/9713:45: I I DC9 88.6 � D 03/l2/9717:46:1� 8737 88.? D 03/IS/9716:22:40 DC9 86.3 D 03/25/97 7:28:08 B727 86.2 D 03/24/97 20:59:14 B727 86.1 D 03/24/97 15:01:37 B727 86.0 D� �' RNIT #23: End of Kenndon Ave. Ntendota Heights Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/27/97 7:25:57 B727 103.6 D 03E21/9� 20:�2:46 DC9 103.0 D 03/27/97 13:3 t:39 B727 103.5 D 03/24/97 9:52:23 B727 102.9 D 03/?4/9713:15:17 B727 102.$ D 03/27/97 13:�3:13 B727 102.7 D 03/31/97 7:10:54 6727 102.7 A 03/24/97 22:26:59 B727 t02.5 D 03/27/97 9:3532 B737 , 102.4 D 03/3l/97 ?0:15:24 6727 102.3 D RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. Eagan Date Time �C M� � Type Level 03/26/9710:07:12 B721 100.1 A 03/19/9713:47:39 B727 97.5 A 03/30/97 6:28: (9 DC9 96.4 A 03/02/97 t3:05:38 DC9 95.1 A 03/23/9711:42:06 B757 95.1 D 03/23/9717:05:15 DC9 95.0 D 03/21/9712:36:26 DC9 94.6 A 03/19/9713:31:45 DC9 943 A 03/?3/9717:10:09 MD88 94.3 D 03/25/97 6:23:21 B727 93.� D Note: �iRTS data missing for 8 ciu�s Page ?0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams `ict� ��(��I I[S(1 .�ICF'� �(:• l.>>i;l(ii;.,i� �[1 Flight Track Base l��Iap Airport Noise and Operations Nlonitoring System ,; Aviation Noise & Sate(lite Programs P1°e �� ,.y � ,,: ..:� s!�' '� , . �i � „t ,: � � t r�� t :� �'�� j�� , 1 � �'" . ti`"._ �'��'�-ti�i.� _ �� '�'V � __��_= • ;• < .'. ;r'o '• . 11�[rc�p��ii[an .�irpvrt, C�,mmi,•��n �. �nalysis of Aircraft 1�loise Events - Aircraft Ldn d�(�) � March Ol to Nlarch 31, 1997 �� Noise 1�tonitor Locations Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 I �8.8 ��.1 63.-� 63.0 73.7 77.2 68.5 66.1 67.4 70.9 �0.-� 5�.-� � �8.? 51.7 6�3.? 64.6 72.? 75.I 64.=� 66.7 �.� 52.4 -�6.7 �6.0 3 63.3 58.$ 68.6 67.6 73.3 74.0 6t.0 69.8. 46.3 61.0 56.5 58.3 4 60.8 59.6 66.4 67.1 76.8 79.? 67.3 68.9 50.0 56.4 56.2 �?.3 5 62.8 5 t.4 6 l J 64�.2 75.? 78.2 68.0 66. t 48.0 54.4 57. l 60. l ( 56.4 47.0 59.7 63.8 7?.6 76.5 67.9 64.4 43.9 49.7 �12.0 51.6 7 53.8 46.9 62.8 64.3 70.3 72.2 58.6 66.9 49.7 57.2 50.5 52.9 $ 56.5 50.1 65.0 63.8 70.5 71.4 57.3 67.3 60J 67.2 56.4 58.-� 9 56.8 54.4 58.2 64.7 72.2 78.9 66.7 66.4 61.9 67.6 48.3 59.� 10 58.2 52.8 63.0 66.6 74.5 80.0 67.3 66.2 47.2 60.7 53.2 56.7 11 57.7 51.9 60.3 64.7 73.4 78.0 68.0 68.6 44.2 48.7 48.3 48.6 12 61.7 �;.2 64.6 65.3 70.1 72.0 59.4 59.3 5 l.2 52.4 49.2 51.3 13 �•2 62.0 68.9 67.4 77.5 77.0 68.2 6�.2 46.0 57.3 54.6 52.0 14 �• i * 64.4 66.8 74.1 78.2 69.4 70.0 54.5 45.4 56.5 55.3 15 54.8 54.9 55.0 59.6 71.3 74.0 65.2 62.9 40:5 57.9 47.5 51.6 16 56.9 * 63. $ 63.4 69.6 72.8 50.7 65.1 66.6 69.3 59.2 60.6 l"7 57.2 523 63Z 66.2 75.6 78.0 68.7 � 68.9 59.8 62.2 53.5 49.2 ($ 56.3 49. l 62.6 62.6 68.4 69.8 54.4 57.2 46.1 58.4 55.7 51.8 19 58.4 53.�, 65.3 67.1 76.3 80.7 70.5 70.5 49.0 60.6 55.8 60. t 20 579 56.5 62.3 69.9 77.4 80.5 71.0 70.1 48.3 62.1 51.2 61.6 21 57.2 55.4 62.4 67.8 78.5 80.2 72.2 71.2 49A 54.3 50.6 57.4 22 59.2 56.7 61.1 68.0 75.5 7$.6 70.0 69.4 52.5 51.5 45.6 59.7 23 55.5 45.1 63.0 61.3 69.0 70.1 58.6 53.9 50.5 54.5 51.7 49.1 24 62.3 6 t.0 66.6 66.5 72.2 73.8 57.9 70.0 48.4 61.1 56.9 56.7 25 60.7 57.4 61.5 66.4 74.5 79.9 71.5 66.6 53.0 53.7 64.5 52.3 26 57. I 55.7 63.1 653 76.5 78.9 68.7 68.8 49.0 6 t.9 53.1 60.9 2'7 60.5 56.0 66.9 66.1 73.5 75.2 53.$ 65.5 65.9 69.6 54.5 57.5 28 59.9 52.9 66.4 70.8 79.8 80.6 71.4 71.6 62.1 649 47.3 54.1 29 � 56.8 55.6 61 S 67J 76.0 78.2 72.1 * 533 59.7 �6.0 47.9. 30 5�.8 54.1 60.3 67.0 75.5 78.4 67.0 68.7 47.7 59.7 49.5 61.6 3( 59.5 54.2 66.8 66.0 7?.2 72.1 56.4 * 63.9 66.7 ».1 5�.9 Mo. Ldn 59.4 55.7 64.4 66.4 74.8 77.6 67.8 69.0 59.0 633 55.1 57.1 Page ?6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs "�ss theur tx•enn• fi�ur hours n/'dcua cn•uiluhlr Note: ARTS data missinQ for 8 duvs �� C " �nal`�sis of Aircraft �ioise Events -�ircraf't Ldn dB(��) . IVlarch O1 to 1�Iarch 31, 1997 tioise �Ionitc�r Gocations (� i Date #13 #1� #l� #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #2� 1 -�j.-1 6�.3 5�.? 69.� 66.-1 75.9 7�.? �7.9 -16.5 7?.8 58.8 71.3 2 �9.3 67.8 63.� 70.-� 61.1 75.1 70.0 62.0 57.6 58.-� 71.1 64.8 3 66.� 69.9 70. ( 7?.0 -�3.? 60.6 -�7.6 -�9.9 62.9 6(.6 76.? 68.0 4 61.9 63.8 6�.? * -�9.2 58.0 52.5 61.8 63.? 61.7 7l.-� 64.0 $ �.6 6�.8 60.1 69.1 62.5 75.0 67.3 6�.9 49.� 60.9 67.0 62.3 ( 43.2 6?.7 60.5 69.1 55.4 68.7 68.9 57.5 49.2 * 61.9 60.9 7 6(.7 70.4 6�.5 73.3 5�.3 59.7 42.? 49.9 * 66.9 73.7 66.3 $ 6?.8 68.8 68.? 70.3 63.7 74.� 71.3 56.3 59.6 68.2 72.6 67.5 9 ' 49.9 66.3 60.� 70.6 59.9 74.3 70.8 56.7 46.0 7t.8 63.8 64.7 10 * * 64•0 73.6 60.5 71.4 69.0 58.0 58.6 65.2 69.4 65.1 11 51.7 64.5 49. t 68.9 58.3 69.9 71.� 64.5 53.9 60.5 54.6 63.2 12 693 75.1 68.2 73.9 58.0 61.6 45.1 51.9 62.6 67.1 75.2 7(.3 13 * * 66•5 7?.8 52.4 62.5 * 59.6 62.2 69.6 72.5 65.6 14 42.6 62.7 50.4 68.9 62.2 .70.5 65.8 61.8 62.3 63.7 63.1 63.0 15 49.8 60.1 50.6 68.6 62.9 75.2 70.7 65.9 57.8 64.9 5�.8 58.7 16 67.3 68.0 68.8 69.2 56.7 67.9 57.0 57.2 65.1 74.9 74.8 63.6 17 56.3 67.3 56.� 70.6 62.1 71.3 69.1 60.0 58.7 75.5 65.2 65.0 18 ' 61.8 68.2 63.6 * 59.6 65.5 57.7 58.4 * 66.5 73.2 62.8 19 58.9 67.0 63.9 70.2 * 71.6 71.7 62.6 54.6 * 66.9 67.5 20 57.8 66.7 62.5 7I.5 67.9 72.0 68.8 63.1 52.6 59.1 68.6 63.7 21 56.3 67.0 59.8 71.3 66.9 73.2 68.5 61.6 47.0 63.7 65.9 65.3 22 46.4 64.5 533 70.2 68.5 77.4 74.5 66.5 48.9 60.1 60.2 64.7 23 63.5 73.2 65.3 74.4 62.0 63.5 48.8 54.2 63.9 65.8 75.1 69.7 24 65.4 7 L 1 68.5 74.4 48.3 59.8 47.7 53.6 61.2 6 l.6 76.8 66.2 2$ 56.5 65.3 59.6 * 58.0 6�.0 62.3 59.2 56.6 61.6 6�t.7 66.3 26 63.9 67.5 67.3 71.�t 59.2 65.4 62.7 59.6 57.1 67.2 71.0 68.7 2'7 66.6 73.0 69.9 75.1 58.4 62.8 53.0 44.0 60.9 67.4 75.8 68.6 28 61.4 67.6 61.8 * 56.7 61.8 54.7 54.1 57.6 61.8 69.7 67.4 29 60.0 65.8 ��.� 70.8 68.1 74.9 73.6 60.4 44.7 62.0 60.6 66.� 30 45.9 65.7 51.8 69.-� 70.0 76.5 74.1 66.5 49.7 58.2 60.9 72.9 31 67.7 72.9 70.8 73.8 * �9.2 51.� �i.8 63.8 6�.3 76:7 60.4 Mo. Ldn b4•0 69.2 65.2 71.8 63.8 71.5 , 68.5 60.6 59.8 67.6 71.7 67.0 * L:rss �hcur �x•enn•-%'i�ur Iruurs of �kuu uruiluhle � Aviation Noise & Satellite�Programs Pave _7 Nvte: ARTS dctta missine far 8 cictvs ` C �l l �� % 1��1� n y .C. �A ' �� O 'fl . C � � � W � � � C O ?.' . � � � : � � � � -_� ' : � . O' °�,: a � • .. .� .....:. ::.�::: - ; : . .:.,: _.�:; ,... . . . �- ri� : �. :.: � ::: . ::. � _ � i �I�i r' I Q �� F� _ � y: , Q _ � � . � �'Y. ..� :� �H-�, ..w � � +:r � .r. �: . �.� -� ;' � ,i a, a. _ � . . ' . . � � O � � , O \ � -- SNOIld�l�d01�d1C'�1 �O % �- � C m � � an .� � � 0 � c a� � y � � an � � [ > � O ,� > O � :;�;�; � o c� a SNOIld��d01d101 �O °/a c r� {� � � o c� a s�voiida�do �dloi �o �ro T� • • • � • • . � / � • • • • • � � .c - , �n .� � � _ b . � _ :.: � :'�: � � o`�n �i. �a . � c �ii � c a. : . O � � ' : > �q �� . O �. p. .,s = '� : �- . _ � �. :.::::-.� ::�::�: •: . :. ::.:: :.: ::..: ::•::::: : •. � . , ,; _ ;,;� . _ _"'�.':- f 1 � I -` , S � � � N ~ SNOIld�l�d01d101 �!O % �'� �v e C : •' .� O � 1.� ��I � Lco .� _ �a O � - C U • � y ' � � � � ' W � � � � c > � �O � > O � o, ��yx] � � � . . . 0 p O O� rr� SNOIld��d01�d1G1 �O % J � !' i t` � O C� O sNoilda�do 1dlo.� �o �ro �. C :• i� �j'�. � � � j�• ; e q �i�.. ii�. � .t J.�;�... . . ii5 �, ..��•� ; ` '��..._,`,.'„"��""`.. � ", ' ��'• � % � . � . `\ �.� ,.�� ..� . � r k � ;� �:. � `� �:�'N, � ! ��'' �'ii� i !,.` ^' � , � ? � `+� �! ;,. `�`�`��>; \ `; � ��•. � ' r �t .1' �� 1/ �� ,! > . /' f 1 ��4 �..—,.''-M I1��`` d , N� 4NA • r,-''��ii. i1 :a� � ti i , d�3 .� r ��_ `��I��Oi.�� .I ' fr;'!)/'i%�z; t� /'�'► 1�,'��lp! ��t• 3 I�� al��?.%jq /,� i � � • � � �.Y �� 1/(!J ��1�� i'�/ � i % �� i %� �� r�� _ - r'- �. iq �i �Y `�q�� + �- ` _ � \\` _ `�\V.:` � ,i"'• \,,�. 1 . • �`�,��u � — � '. �� .. �� '/`.' t \ .,�. ^..:� �� . .. " . . :� " � t _' , - . r, • r �. �t �. 9 � t ; `. i '�/ ` 'ti i -� � i t - - � .. . ..r' �_:.+.•:..: .t• ,_. .. � � . .. . . . .. , ._ .� •i/. �:Fv' ..�M � s... ., . � �: ;�tetropolitan Airports Commission Proposed 1Vorth Boundary Corridor Gate Penetratio� t�naiys�� -,- Niinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport � March 1997 1.0% (39) Carrier Jet Departures North of Proposed 095° (M) Corrid.or Policy �oundary Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satetlite Programs Metropofitan Airports Commission Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport March 1997 3840 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet 1)epartures 38 ... Carrier Jet Departures (1.0%) North of Proposed 095° (IVI) Corridor Policy Bou�dary �= � �_ 38 TRACKS CROSSED P-G�TE �EET CODUT=1 (2.0�} RIGNT C4UNT=31 (97.4�) �� =4 DEVIATION FR0,�1 CENTER OF GATE (�t) )0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Ptograms Page 3 Metropo(itan Airports Commission IViinneapolis - �t, Pau� International Airport March 1997 � �� 3840 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures 1... Carrier Jet Departure - Early Turnout (Ov0°Io (1>Torth Side Before Three M�les) 1 T.RACKS CROSSED P—GATE LErT CQ�NT=1 (100.0�) RIGNT COUNT=O (0.0�) DEVIATION FROU CEUTER OF GATE (fl Paje 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs 11 � :�letropolitan Airparts Commission Southern Boundary Corridor Gate ]Penetration Analysis Minneapolis - St.1'aul International Airport March 1997 9.6 %(370) Carrieut eo D L Localizer) South of Corridor (So Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs PaDe 5 Metropo(itan Airports Commission w � o � � � � � � tiC O O O N O Q O _� •. /1 _ r� . � � � . �,� March 1997 3840 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Uepartures 365 ... Carrier Jet Departures 9.5%) South of Corridor (South of 29L Localizer) 365 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE � LEFT COUNT=363 (99.5%) RIGN i CO�NT=2 (0.5%) . , """"""""'r"""""""" ""'_"""""' """""""" ' """"""""' """"""""' e 0 s •� s y s ��e•°�i= 0 e. � � � � '--'-"------� ��- s-p. '--';---'-------'----- ---------'-----------------------------------'-"----- e�••�i � i� + • •i�' �~ ��v • ��• = o s • �� ~ � , , , , e ' ' ost� e � , . ' ----- � ------- -------------- i o-- rr- � ---------------------�------------ ---------- --------------- ��i�s• e e , i e�'� • � �s se . ••, • s v � �� , � � � � � � • � � � � � � """"""""""""'..""""'"""""""""' �"""""""""..."""""""'""""""""' """' f �� -4nnn .-�o�0 0 2000 40�00 60 DEVIA110N FROM CENTER OF GATE (fl Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satetlite Programs �� (.. � � � i�tetropolitan Airports Commission Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport � March 1997 � � � 3840 ... Total 11L and 11]E� Carrier Jet Departures 5... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (0.1%) (South Side �efore "�"hree Niiles) 5 TRACKS CROSSED P-GAT� LEFT CQUNT=1 (20.0�) RIGNT CO�,�T=4 (80.0�) �; �1 DEVIATION FRO�� CENTER OF GA i r (ff) 00 Aviation iVoise & Satellite Programs Page 7 Metropolitan Airports Commission Sou thern BoundarY Corridor Gate I'enetration Analys�s Minneapolis - �t. l'aul International Airport � March 1997 �� 1.4% (56) Carrier Jet Departures 5° South of Corridor. (5° �outh of 29L Localizer) R Page 8 ' Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs `e u i�tetcopolitan Airports Commission � Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport , March 1997 I� 3840 .e. Total l�.L ancl 11R Carrier Jet Departures 5�' ... Carrier Jet Departu�es (1._ 3%) 5° ,South of Corridor (a° South of 29L Localizer) 51 TRACKS CROSSED P-GAiE �, LtF I COUNT�=51 (100.0�) RIGNT COU��T=O (0.0�) 0 .. � . . �: o) e e � • � � , --� --�-------------------�--------------------------�---------------------------�-------------------------- .o � v • •e • � � � O • e � • • s e � o • o • � oe • ° o e � O� • ° • � , Oi"'iv---------------------, ' ' r''� • e • • • • . � O II OL"""_""""'""""""'t""""""""""""""""""""""""""""' """""""""""""' N C�7 � , � i C� I � i � , r """"""""""""' � 1"""""""""""""J"""""""""""_" "L """"""""""""" C� -a��v -2�� 2��0� 4�� DEUTAlION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ff) Aviation Noise & Sateltite Programs Page 9 u M�tropolitan ,Airports Commission 1Vlinneapolis - �t. I'aul Internationai Airport , 3: March 1997 �; � � � � _. � � �- 3840 ... '�'otal 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures 5... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (0.1%) (South Side Before Three Miles) 5 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATt LEFT COU�T=4 (80.0�) RIGNT COUVT=1 (20.0�) DEVIATION FRON CFNTER OF GATE (fl) Page t0 Aviation Noise & Sateltite Programs 'J V � MINUTES NI�ASAC OPER�lTIONS COMIVIITTEE APRIL 7, 1997 The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission West Terminal Buiiding MAC ANSP Conference Room, and called to order at 10:10 a.m. The following members were in attendance: Mark Salmen, Chairman - NWA Bob .Johnson - MBAA John Nelson - Bloomington Kevin Batchelder - Mendota Heights Tom Hueg — St. Paul Jon Hohenstein — Eagan Advisorv: Amie Yeske - FAA Traci Erickson - MAC Chad Leqve - MAC John Foggia - MAC A G E N D A NADP ANALYSIS John Foggia, MAC ANSP Manager, briefed the committee on Noise Abatement Departure Profile (NADP) data. He stated that the close-in NADP benefits those communities closest to the airpo�t and the distant NADP benefits those communities farther away from the airport. The communities surrounding MSP are a mixture of close-in and distant communities, unlike other airports that have more distinct close and distant communities. The close-in procedure is as follows: At 800 to 1000 feet above field elevation (afe) thrust cutback is initiated. At 3000 feet (afe) the flaps are retracted and normal climb is resumed. This procedure helps reduce noise close in by reducing the thrust at the beginning of a climb. The distant proc�dure is as follows: At 800 to 1000 feet (afe}, flaps are slowly retracted and a.little while later thrust is reduced, but not as much as with the close-in- procedure. At 3000 feet (afe) normai climb is resumed. This 1 r i procedure helps reduce noise to distant communities by gaining more altitude close to the airport and combining reduced thrust and aititude for noise reduction. John said currently, in the absence of any airport-directed NADP, the airiines at MSP are flying a � distant NADP. John showed severai ovefieads depicting the benefits of both the ciose-in and distant procedures for different aircraft types. The biggest difference between the finro procedures is seen with the B727's (Stage il). The 8757 (Stage iil) aircraft shows almost no change in benefit from using either the close-in or distant procedure. John said these two graphs indicate that in three years when all aircraft are Stage III, or hushed, the differences in the procedures for noise abatement purposes will be almost non-existent. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked what data was being used for fleet mix information. John explained that 1994 fleet mix data was used in generating the NADP contour. � John's recommendation, according to the numbers, is that the.only place where switching to a close-in procedure would make sense is off the 29's (to the NVI�, which wauld affect Minneapolis and North Richfield, because they have closer-in communities. The numbers (see attachments) indicate that 10% of the parcels within the 60 DN� would benefit from changing to a close-in procedure. . John Nelson, Bloomington, asked why parcel information was used rather than population data. John Faggia explained that parcel information was used rather than population information because population information assumes an equal� density over a given area of land and parcel information uses the actual structure locations. � John noted that ALPA has asked that both the north and south parallel runways in either direction have the same NADP. In other words, the NADP for 11 L and 11 R would be the same and the ��.. NADP for 29� and 29R would be the same. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if John still believed a testing period was not nesded for implementation. John said that since the airport will be 100% Stage III within 3 years, a recommendation should be made to MAC as soon as possible and the issue be reevaluated a couple of years after the all Stage III deadline. John Neison, Bloomington, asked if there was any way ta study the effects of a change in procedure after its implementation using ANOMS. John Foggia said it could not be definitively done. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked what needed to be done by MASAC in order to have the NADPs implemented. Mark Salmen, NWA, explained that all airlines are required to develop and submit to the FAA both a cfose-in and distant departure procedure for each aircraft type. The airlines will then fly their defauft procedure until or unless there is direction firom an airpori designating a specific procedure be used for any ar all of the runways for noise abatement purposes. John Foggia explained that after MASAC passes a recommendation to the Planning & Environment Committee, a letter will be sent to Bruce Wagoner, FAA, with copies to the airiines, outlining the appropriate noise abatement departure procedure to be used for each runway end. 2 { \ JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN, MOVED AND JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, SECONDED TO ACCEPT THE DATA AND TO HAVE THE FU�L MASAC BODY BRIEFED AT THE REGULAR �� APRIL 1997 MEETING IN ORDER FOR MEMBERS TO HAVE TIME TO BRING THE INFORMATION TO THEiR COMMUNITIES AND VOTE AT THE REGULAR MAY 1997 MEETING. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was adjoumed at 11:20 a.m. Respectfully submitted: Melissa Scovronski Committee Secretary TOPIC FOR THE JUNE 13. 1997 OPERATIONS MEETING Minneapolis Straight-out Departure Analysis Outline �� i� � �� o �o m � � � � � 0 0 0 0 0 0�.p� oo 0 �N NO00 ~NO �-0.- ~00000 ~00000 ~��.-O fD ~f�tOt�Oe ~03�000 ~�n000 �N �N �� O�a u�ao ��n � n n n n n n n O !4 0 C! C; F�0000 ��N V'OQ �a0.+�0e-N F�o'f000 ��NNO� ��NNtA� ��NO.- ��Qf(•frr �- �A , � N (7 r' � n n n niO- r°p., n � � Z O O O O O Z O O O O O Z O O O O O Z O O O O O Z O O O O O = N�.�j O O O z O O O O O Z O O O O O W G G � G G1 C G G � � � W � r�. � � n � o 0 v�p �• �, r- -�00000 -�00000 -�00000 JO0000 -��0000 -��tONO�- JQ�000 -�c�'f�000 n. o Q o Ci G o N^ o`� Q = w� c � U�'=' � m m� � m i°ror. � � `a zNN000 ZNo.-o� z00000 Z00000 Z�?�orc z��noco Z��000 Z�,�000 aW o 0 o c c c o c 0 `* z � W� m� t�o e�o t�o m� i�ONG^ �N t�p N �O Q�n000 OnNCOOt7 Q�rO�N Q$t'f 000 Q��-Otl0 QO��[f� Q��NO.- Q�N(7�r � v �. � m �, � m �, T m �, a m 2.� m �.Z m �, � m �, � m . E� m o_ E� m o_ E,� m o_ E,� m o_ E E m�d_ �,� m o_ E� m o_ E� m o_ ��C%�g ti��j �g �i�Ci mg iiLLU og tiLLc� og ��ci pg ti�c) mg ►iWt� m8 m,y >.c o m� �.c o m� a.c � m_ �.c � m_ a.c � m._ a.c � m� �.c o. m, ac o �� 0'� N �= 0'� N �� Q'� tA �� a� N • c� a� t� c� ��n t� c� Q'� tA �� n t0 �� Z N"i� 2 �'� Z �� Z �� Z N� Z N't Z � 4` Z `° '° � � .� .�3 :° :4 b?�.�j000 �tAOrOe- ~00000 �00000 ��.^�O�O ~N�h07 ~��000 �n�000 � � � � M A� (^D t^D (AO � t^D .- t^D '"' tA0 Tp tD pp F�$000 ��NC70�7' O�e-OOtV O�MO00 ��NNO� � �NtA� ��0000 O�^Nr0 C � N N r ~� h A n A n n fb+ r Z O O O O O Z O O O O O Z O O O O O Z O O O O'O z.� O O O O Z�� O O O a O O O O O Z O O O O O W G O G G G O O G � � �A A n A A A l��.p A Z O O O O O z O O O O O � O O O O O = O 8 O O O Z Q O O O O Z� N N O.- Z N tD O O O z O O O O O � o O o a o c�' o 0 Na c u! U� m e�} o m m ' m eeo m va Z.Q-NO00 JZOfO�-Or- 200000 �00000 Zg�+-O t0 zd.��tf ORf z� N 000 Z��000 mn. G G 0 G G C°D �O G aw . v� °� �- o o e o o e o 0 � Z a� Q w w m �oc�f �o c� ap ro r. ro �cp ' N -�N 000 -��NNCP1 -�n�-OON J�'C�000 -�o��-Oa0 -��V��tpr -��^000 -��ON�-O o.y ar� Z� 2c� Z� 2; r' Z.-m��' Z ZN.- m— G C O O G GN O'� G �� 2. � m �. � m 2,�, m ?,,�, o �. �, � ,2.� m �. � m . �. � m EEm�— �EmO-' �E��— EE��— EE��— EEOO— �E�O— �EmO— �u`°.v=aog 'iu�.t,`°j m� LLu1°.v a.gc �iiv n.g u�.u`°.v=oes �iiv ms LLu".c� �8 ILLLCj m8 m.- ?� C U m.� T C U m�- T C U m— �+ G O C� -- �g. C U m— �. C U m.� T C O m.- 7+ C O c �� L�� _ �� y. c �G �N c �� c �a �N c �� c �0 �� c �0 �N t� � Z lA '� z UI � Z N`E Z �� .Z= tlJ � Z fn '� Z tp '� Z w a ,o .0 c ro s r � � g a o = 3 = � � n '� � � 9 c � ac � m W v � tl � Z ' N > � . G � � 0 0 b�0000 �00000 �o ro n n , .� �^ O �j�ONO 0�-0000 F� F- ^ t0 b n n Z O O O O O Z O O O O O O G 0 0 n � Z00000 Z00000 C C �D b t0 �O Z�.�j 0000 z00000 O p 0 0 �o n w � N� O N O Z� O O O O C '� �'a � �a E. ii ��j= LL � `°x g m $ mU m,� S+ C U m LL �. C U C� O � N C�� N �S` Z �` Z' ___ Tv iv � �0 0 00000 �00000 n n �o�,�000 �8,0000 io w ti ti � O O O O O z O O q O O � G 0 0 n i. =00000 Z00000 G O t0 b t0 f0 ZO0000 ZO000'f,� � G O _ 0 0 _ ' ro m Z��000 a$000a G G �. �, � �. �, E m��=°' mE�=_ m u' m $ mLL S� G U m� S� C tt�/ =�a �N =�a �N � z� N Z m Y ( � � _. M �L' q! C � N s �,�, �,..� `i � � � q� Parceis addedlsubtracted Parcels added/subtracted Distant or Giose-in Distant or Close-in by Close-in Prxedure by Ciose-!n Prxedure Based on the >65 Total ased on the Total Based on the >65 Total Based on the Total Bloomington Distant Procedure Distant Procedure 83 388 � Eagan Distant Procedure Distant Procedure 17 14 Inver Grove Heights Mendota N/A N/A Distant Procedure Close-in Procedure Mendota Heights Ciose-In Procedure Close-In Procedure Minneapolis North Richfieid Ciose-In Procedure Close-In Procedure Close-In Procedure Ciose-In Procedure South Richfield � Distant Procedure Distant Procedure St Paul Sunfish Lake N/A N/A Distant Pracedure I Distant Pracedure I /�''.. t _.� >> ::/ � i� . r"�'.�ir..�_�'� . i n o a � � � C I' 1 � C � o I .� _�------ ' � -- — � i �- � d L ---._. � ' --s�'�-�'7� !? 1 2i o • •E,\�, � C � . y , e .. a ., '' ; .-. Q � �• i � ; � _ � � c � o �. � � � -- � ' " yJ ) � I Q � ,� � �� /. � I ♦ ..yi � .. �, �� N 1 I 1 �� ° Vo {�a � � ! �;,o o � c 6 ( � � � 'r ,r�,� / I � � � �'�_.��r��.'.� I � '� '� �'�'_ /J.�'�'�'.� ,�.--'�'�. _'� '� ' o v -�-�'�'�.�'.^ i` % � y c' I ✓� /((( . t,a _, ^ C i � � O I!p ! � � h ' 1h1�� o O� O � �� ^ U c� "� � C ,� : � 1 � �� i � � °\,�� ' G = ' � �_ � ♦ _ � - � � • O Ci . •,�-"' � %r�+� � a o 0 .i ,o� . :, , • I� N � �! / 0 : . ' , �\\ �� ` : � � `3 � ;�� _._.�._ . � ` � `,v��'�j, I , ♦ -t d �i � � �,..,', o. ' ^,( ; � � � i � �-,.' • � � ` � � � • � : ��i._ �, , ' � cn � '� •. � � + �� ,� .� � _ �\�. C ` � .. .� � � � W '� �} o ., �,. . � � � ( . �� ' _,, ♦��• � � °f -/': � � „ ,� % •'J c � - --- J o • �� ...� 1; ., ; � • � � _� j � � � - -- -- - --_ = -=_�_�; � ` , � ` � , ; i'.....'u-.-.,.-- -�._--...�- p t ( . ♦ I ' �. i- .�j , `- � � 1 ' "l';.: . / , ' l s � �� y \ ' � / � .-... \� . � . � i �„ �' \, �.. E• o�f � � �-� ) ` y ,,,,,,. I � � � � ��-' "� � ...... � � � � �. ' � ' � � � � �-�..�✓ �t� t--�'�-�-�--'�• � � Q ./� � / A� � � . I �, �.^\'�� .�� . � �� ' � �\ / � w '\ ' .. �``` , ' . J C' � ' ; r ." � ` � ♦ �' � � �`� <. � + � � / `r � � � I ♦ � � ; �•\ , i � � ! �..i r . _ , � .... t I c'� �r ♦ � y \ . ♦ I � r� / .. � � ��.. .ti � � / � � I � � � 1 _ � '�'. yc;; � � ,� � � � ", e ♦ ��" . ``. �0 � i� �� 1 � � - 1 `` �1 � " �� ♦ � � r �' + � 1 ,� r C . � ' .,-� , I V 'O � OC , C � � - ' — .. � � , 1 Cl � 00 � � i � S � C _ . i • � i o " � �� - j ` /`; • s'� � m � 1 _ - _ `, ^ ~"{.�.�r 1 "•�. � �� ' � t �' . - .. - , � -- � � � � . � � �.�_.�... -�+.-------`---------i � , r'—'._'_- �� ' � � -' '- � �. . 1 � ,� � x �'�'.�'�'�'�'�'�'r�'�'�'�'�'.�'�'�� — � " ' . ` � ' •� ' ' ' � . ._ � i '.+ . � (" �; _ C. MINUTES FOR NORTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY AIRPORT RELATIONS COALITION An informal meeting of the Northern Dakota County Airport Relations was held ` on Tuesday, Apri115,1997 at 8:00 a.m. Present were Jon Hohenstein, Eagan; Jim Toye, Mendota; Steve Hughes and Chris Moates, Inver Grove Heights. The following topics were informally discussed: Noise Departure Profile Analysis -Close-in and distant departure proceduxes. Discussion of Workshop for Commissioners -Evening meeting with other Northern Dakota County airport commissions, consisting of bus tour with several stops, possibly ANOMS sites, Mendota Heights overlook, and others. Date, time, locations and route path to be determined later. Northwest Airlines Runway Consfrucfion Challenge -Construction on the south parallel runway was postponed for one year due to NWA's concern with levels of traffic. Some discussion occurred regarding possibility of an EIS. Cify Updates -Brief inention of Mendota being in corridor for pt. 150. Other Business -Mitigation didn't surface at the Legislature. -American Association of Airport Execu�ives Conference in Minneapolis, May 12-14. -FICAN public hearing on Tuesday, May 13,1997 at Thunderbird. Two sessions, afternoon (1-4) is technical, evening (6-9) is community issues. -IGH is looking for consensus from other NDCARC cities for MASAC abolishment. Future Meefings Next meeting was set for Tuesday, May 20,1997 at the City of Mendota Heights Conference Room, 8:00 a.m. To: Kevin Batchelder From: Chris Moates Subjech Overview of April NDCARC meeting Date: Apri128,1997 T'he informal meeting consisted of Jon Hohenstein, Steve Hughes, Jim Toye , and myself. 'Three people were present initially, so Jon decided that we did not have a quorum, although we really dori t have any.formal definition of a quorum for this group. The following topics were discussed: -Close-in and distant departure procedures. This was to be discussed in depth at the next MAC meeting. -Evening meeting with other Northern Dakota County airport commissions, consisting of bus tour with Ellsworth Stein. The need to establish a time, locations to visit and route path to follow will have to occur. Steve suggested stops at ANOMS sites and a Cliff Road development site. He also suggested the date be the same as the June 11 Inver Grove Heights commission meeting, and �� the City Council may want to attend. Jim suggested an overlook site in Mendota Heights. -Jon mentioned that construction on the south parallel runway was postponed for one year due to NWA's concern with levels of traffic. Jon would ask Jenrufer if this problem would surface again next year. Some discussion occurred regarding possibility of an EIS. -Brief inention of Mendota being in corridor for pt.150. -Eagan now has a pro-business City Council (3-2) with new NWA employee on board. Other Business -Mitigation didri t surface at the Legislatu.re. -American Association of Airport Executives Conference in Minneapolis, May 12-14. -FICAN public hearing on Tuesday, May 13,1997 at Thunderbird. Two sessions, afternoon (1-4) is technical, evening (6-9) is community issues. Jon mentioned that FICAN is more interested in research and technical analysis that � they've been doing. Several topics, including quiter fleets with stage 4, ' community unpact with noise effects, departure procedures, appropriateness of DNL65 vs. DNL60. -Steve Hughes mentioned thafi IGH is looking for consensus from other NDCARC cities for MASAC abolishment. Next meeting was set for Tuesday, May 20,1997 at the City of Mendota Heights Conference Room, 8:00 a.m. Agenda items will be the same as April's. Unfinished business items will be: Update on Northwest Airlines Challenge Group discussion of workshop C � � � � • ' � . r I. , ►�- A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 9, Number 6 April 21,1997 Dulles dnt't .�� • � �: � � i � � � � � • : � 1 � 1 The Fairfax County, VA, board of supervisors agreed April 7 to amend the comprehensive plan for the county to expand the recommended no-build line for new homes near Dulles Intemational Airport from the 65 dB DNL noise contour to the 60 contour, and to include general, but very vaguely worded, requirements to disclose noise impact near the airport. But, despite the strong urb ng of the Federal Aviation Administration and against the recommendation of the county's planning commission, the boazd did not change the county's zoning ordinance, which still allows construction of new homes in the 65-75 dB DNL contour. The county's comprehensive plan is the policy document that guides land use decisions. While it now recommends against new residential development beyond the 60 dB DNL contour, the zoning ordinance still le�ally allows it. Beginning to take a more proactive role in local land use issues, the FAA urged -- ,, the county to change its zoning.ordinance to make it consistent with the compre- � ) hensive plan, but the county plannina staff persuaded the board that step was not necessary in light of updated, and dramatically reduced, noise contours that pull (Continued on p. 42) Raleigh-Durham Int'Z AIRPORT 5END5 DISCLOSI:t12E NOTICES TO OVER 9,000 PROPERTY OWNERS NEAR RDi7 In an effort to keep noise-sensitive people from inadvertendy buying homes near Raleigh-Durham International Airport, the airport authority in eazly April mailed notices of "potential aircraft noise impact" to over 9,Q00 owners of property near the airport located as far out as the 55 dB DNL noise contour. The North Carolina Residential Property Disciosure Act, enacted on Jan. i, 1996, requires the property owners to disclose these notices to all prospective purchasers of their property. The airport authority wants to make sure that people interested in purchasing residential property near the airport will be notified of the noise impact, Armando Tovar, noise o�cer for RDU, explained. �-Ie said that some new home buyers have complained that Realtors showed them property at a time of day when there were no aircraft operations going on and they only learned of the noise impact after they moved into their new homes. Tovar acknowledged that some of the property owners located in the 5�-65 dB DNL composite noise contours could challenge their inclusion in the mailing because they fall outside of the 65 dB DNL contour the federal govemment uses as the threshold of compatible land use around airports. (Continued an p. 43) Copyright m 1997 by Airport Noise Report, Ashburn, Va. 22011 In This Issue... Dulles ... The Fairfax Counry Board moves the no- build line for new homes from 65 dB DNL to 60 in the county plan but leaves zoning ordinance unchanged - p. 41 Raleigh-Durham ... Airport sends notices of noise impact to over 9,000 property owners near airport - p. 41 Burbank ... City asks appeals court to review FAA approval of use of PFCs to help fund terminal - p. 44 Reno-Tahoe ... Airport board approves contract for soundproofmg of additional homes near airport - p. 44 Settttle-Tacoma ... EPA questions FAA conclusion that new runway will not violate air standazds - p. 45 Austin ... State of Texas agrees to move fleet, facili- ties to new airport allowing closing of Mueller - p. 46 United Kingdom ... Run- way opponents prepare to move from trees to tunnels in effort to block construction at Manchester Airport - p. 46 San Diego ... Airlines honored for meeting airport's use restrictions - p. 4� Conferences ... INCE to hold seminaz at PSU - p. 48 42 Airport Noise Report Dulles, from p. 4l almost all of the 65 dB DNL contour within the airport boundary and leave very little opportunity for new develop- ment within the updated 60 contour. Some county supervisors also were concerned that if the boundary of the Airport Noise Overlay District (t1NIOD) in the zoning ordinance were expanded from the 65 dB DNL contour to the 60 contour, it would capture 800 homes which had previously been outside the ANIOD. They did not want to put the property of these homeowners under a cloud. FAA Posation At a March 24 board meeting, William Albee of the FAA's Office of Environment and Energy, conveyed the FAA's official position on the matter to the county board. He said that, while the aaency applauded the proposed revision to the county's comprehensive plan, it was "highly concerned" that the zonin� ordinance would not be consis- tent with either the plan or with federal standazds for compatible land use. "We believe that failure to include the comprehensive plan provisions in the amendments to the zoning ordinance greatly diminishes the likelihood that the envisioned buffer zone will become a reality," Albee said. He urged the county to amend the zoning ordinance to at least limit new residential development to the 65 dB DNL contonr to conform with the federal land use guideline. "Some zoning jurisdictions, including Fairfax County in its existing ordinance, have chosen not to adopt the DNL 65 dB federal land use compatibility standazd for residential development," Aibee said. "Our auidance urges jurisdic- tions who allow such non-compatible development to at least incorporate into their building codes requirements for su�cient soundproofing to make the indoor environment reasonably bearable. But I want to clearly convey to you that such mitigation measures do not result in compatible land uses," he told the county board. The FAA "strongly emphasizes," AIbee said, that the 65 dB DNL standard applies to the outdoor environment as well as the indoor environment, and we strongly discourage any new residential development at or above this exposure level. Remember, to reatize the noise level reduction from this extra soundproofing requires closed windows and artificiai ventiIation year-round, no matter how favorable outdoor weather conditions are for fresh air. 5oundproofing obviousiy does not address the outdoor noise environmental at all, and at exposures above DNL 65 dB, many people can be expected to compIain about interference with outdoor activities." Therefore, he said, "the FAA does not re�ard the soundproofing of single family residential structures inside DNL 65 dB contours as a su�cient mitigation measnre to achieve the federal land use compatibility standards:' The county boazd decided to postpone its vote on the plan amendment to give it time to consider Albee's comments, which were presented at a March 24 public hearing on the proposal. But, at its Apri17 meeting, the board's vote did not indicate that it was swayed by FAA's azsument regard- in� the need to chan�e the zonina ordinance� Albee told ANR the agency was pleased that the county took the action it did in terms of amending its comprehen- sive plan, but said that leaving the zoning ordinance unchanged could be misleading to other jurisdictions around the country unfamiliar with the matter and lead them to believe the county would approve homes in the 65-75 dB DNL contour. The Metropolitan Washington P.irports Commission, which operates both Dulles Internadonal and Washington National airports, supports the county board's action "wholeheartedly," Neal Phillips, noise officer for the airports, told ANR. "We applaud them for their action." The board's action also had the support of the Dulles Area Transportation Association and the Washington Airports Task Force. But the Fairfax County Planning Commission was atso applauded for its efforts to have the zoning ordinance amended to match the comprehensive plan. At the March 24 public hearin' on the land use issue, Joe Annunziata, a member of the Fairfax County Airports Advisory Commit- tee, publicly applauded the planning commission members "for their sense of lon� terzn ptanning, commitment to the county's overall interests, and courage in the face of pressures to weaken their recommendation" that the zoning ordinance be made consistent with the county plan. He also asked the board to hold a public hearing on planning commission's recommendadon that the zoning ordinance be amended so that Fairfax County residents could be heard on the issue. The boazd declined to hold such hearings. Updated Contours Both the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance reference noise contours that were provided to the county in 1983 and published in the 1985 Part 150 Airport Noise Comparibility program for Dulles. These contours were recently updated in light of the federal requirement to phase out Stage 2 aircraft, and the county has accepted updated noise maps submitted by MWAA to the FAA in 1993 as part of an addendum to the Part 150 program. The county staff report presented to the board noted that, while the updated contours aze substantially smaller than the earlier ones, "there has been rapid �owth in operations at the airport, and continued a owth is anticipated in the future. MWAA has forecast a total of over 368,000 operations (takeoffs and landings) for nearly 11 million passenger enplanements (individual passenger departures) for the year 2000, compared with over 240,000 operations and five million enplanements in 1990, and under 150,000 operations and just over 1.26 million enplanements in 1982." The staff report notes that MWAA's long-range plans for Dulles include construction of two new runways capable of Airport Noise Report �''� Apri121,1997 43 supporting air carrier operations. The airport authority has estimated the number of potential annual aircraft operation at Dulles to be 740,000, triple the 1990 figure. Air carrier operations could potentially increase to 545,000 (74 percent of total operations); quadruple the 1990 figure. Cargo operation also are expected to increase substantially both in numbers and in proportion of total airport operations. Nighttime operations by cargo aircraft are expected to increase from an average of 46 operations per day to a lonb term potential of 190 nighttime operations per day.� Raleigh-Durham, from p. 4I He said that initial reaction to the nodces has run the gamut from people being very upset about the notices, to those familiaz with disclosure laws and seeking clarification, to Realtors concerned about the impact of the notice on their business, to people considering buying property azound the airport seeking information about the noise impact. One caller, who Tovar said described herself as a"JD," seems to be looking at the legal aspects of the notice. She asked very spec�c questions about the contours and how and when they were calculated, he said. The airport authority decided to send the disclosure notices to property owners after the jurisdictions around the airport rejected or tabled a model zoning ordinance devei- oped by the airport which had a disclosure requirement as well as a requirement for avigation easements and better soundproofing. The cities of Raleigh and Cary and Wake County rejected the model ordinance outright; while the town of Morrisville never placed it on its agenda and Durham County tabled consideration of it. In addition to rejecting the model zoning ordinance, the City of Raleigh rezoned for high-density residential use a portion of the land which had been designated with an airport noise overlay district. Some residential developments have been approved by the county or aze in the process of being approved inside the 65 dB DNL contour and ap- proaching the '70 dB DNL contour, Tovar said. The airport authority fully understands that it can't stop residential development neaz the airport, he said, noting there is too much land in the contours around the airport for it all to be developed commercially. The airQort recognizes that the land off the end of the runways will be developed residentially, for the most part, so the notification process is intended to eliminate people who are hi�hly sensitive to noise from living near the airport, he explained. RDU has in place a noise budget rule so noise contours are shrinking around the airport and complaints are down because aircraft are aetting quieter, Tovar said, but he noted that by 2010 there will be an increase in the number of aircraft operations which will offset that gain and that the airport plans to build a third parallel runway. The "Aircraft Noise Notification" mailed to the property owners informs them that they are listed by either the Wake or Durham County tax o�ces as the owner of a pazcel of land "located within the general area surrounding Raleigh- Durham International Airport that is exposed to average aircraft noise levels which exceed typical ground-based or backb ound noise." The purpose of the notice "is to advise you that exposure to aircraft noise mav affect the usability of some land for certain types of noise sensitive uses, including residential use: ' The notice reccmmends that "persons who are sensitive to aircraft noise should satisfy themselves before buyin� the property that exposure to such noise will not materially affect their ability to use and enjoy land whose purchase they may be considering: ' The airport offered to provide information to those receiving the request "which may be helpful to property owners and prospective purchasers in assessing the likely effect of aircraft noise on the use of land they own or are considering purchasing." Tovar said the airport has developed a brochure, entided "Aircraft Noise Abatement Program," with sections on flight paths, sound measurement terms, and noise abatement efforts. It includes several maps showing runway operations and air traffic flow for the two parallel runways at R.DU. The airport's 1993 and 2010 noise contours are overlaid on the maps in different colors. Also, at the request by the airport's noise advisory committee, the acoustical consuItant for the airport, Harris Miller MiIler & Hanson, Inc., developed what Tovar termed "one-way" contours which show the noise exposure from departures for each of the main pazallel runways separately. This approach separates the noise impact of each runway and depicts a bigger bulge from departure noise than would be seen on the annual contour map, which averages depaz- ture and arrival data and data for both runways. Property owners and prospective home buyers can also come to the airport's noise office to see detailed flight track tracings. . The notice expIains that the Residential Property Disclo- sure Act requires the owners of residential real property "to disclose to prospective purchasers the existence of certain conditions associated with the property no later than the time an offer to purchase, exchange or option the property is made, or an option to purchase the property pursuant to a lease with an option to purchase is exercised: ' The act does not specify airport noise as one of the conditions that must be disclosed. However, it does specify that any notice from a governmental agency affecting residential property must be disclosed. The airport is a governmental agency and thus has authority to issue the notice regardin� noise exposure. Composite Contours Used The nouces of potential noise impact were mailed to 9,093 owners of property in Wake County and 671 owners of property in Durham County located in 5�, 60, 65, and 70 dB DNL composite noise contours developed by the airport. A composite noise contour map was sent to the property Airport Noise Report 44 Airport Noise 12eport owners alon� with the airport's notice. The composite contours were derived from three sets of noise contour data: the 1992 noise contour for which there is historic data, and forecast data for the years 2000 and 2010. The 2010 data contemplates the noise impact from the addition of a third paralIel runway at the airport. To derive the composite noise contours, the airport superimposed 'the 1992, 2000, and 2010 contours on top of each other and took the outer boundary of each one. Even though the state's Residential Property Disclosure Act only requires that the notices be sent to owners of residential property, the airport also mailed them to owners of commercial property. The names of the property owners were provided to the airport by the two counties. They were taken from county tax lists. Wake County has a Geoa aphical Information System so it could superimpose its tax maps of the airport's composite noise contours to deternune which properties were located in the target azea. Durham County is only in the process of obtaining GIS, so it provided the names of property owners on tax maps, any portion of which fell within the target contours. Some property owners on the Durham County list were beyond the 55 dB DNL contour, the outer boundary of the airport's target area, but relatively few, Tovar said.0 Burbank - . . . r r,�' � , r ' � . , �'� , , i1 The City of Burbank filed a motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on April 11 challenging the propriety of the Federal Aviation Admini- stration's Record of Decision approving the use of $24.2 million in Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) revenue to help fund the construction of a proposed new passenger terminal at Burbank-GIendate-Pasadena Airport. Attorneys for the City of Burbank said the move could cause problems for the airport authority, which has already deposited $39 million with the Los Angeles Superior Court as the probable value of a 131-acre tract of land it is seeking to purchase from Lockheed Martin Corp. for the site of the new terrninal. Some of that $39 million came from PFC revenue. If the appeals court were to stay the use of the PFC funds for the terrninal project, then the airport authority would have to find substitute funds to compensate for that loss. "'The airport is at risk," said Peter Kirsch of the Washington, DC, law firm Cutler & Stanfield, which represents the City of Burbank. But, Richard Simon of the Los Angeles law firm McDer- mott Will & Emery, which represents the airport authority, contended that, as of April 24, the airport is in no danger. On that day, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Abby Soven allowed Lockheed to withdraw approximately $35 million of the funds the airport had deposited w:-:� _ ..:rt toward purchase of the land. "Not only is tha horse out of the barn; it's now Alpo," Simon quipped, explaining that it's too late to retrieve the funds. The airport authority is in the process of moving to intervene in Burbank's motion challenging FAA's approval of the use of PFC funds for the new terminal project, Simon said. "FAA has clearly fulfilled the standazd for review" of the airport's application to use the PFC funds, he said. Disavowal Sought Meanwhile, Burbank Mayor Bill Wiggins has called on the mayors of the neishboring cities of Glendale and Pasadena to publicly disavow statements by the Burbank- Glendale-Pasadena Airgort Authority that it intends to violate a state law that gives the City of Burbank the riaht to approve a plan to expand the airport. In letters to the mayors of Glendale and Pasadena, Wig�ns said he was "b eatly dismayed" that the airport authority would defy a section of the state's Public Utilities Code that no court has ever held invalid. Wigo ns pointed ont that efforts by the airport authority to have the state law ruled invalid were rejected several weeks ago by a U.S. District Court judge. "Attomeys for the airport authority stated they intend to ianore the Public Utilities Code secrion in a legal brief filed with Los Angeies Superior Court Judge Abby Soven, who is presiding over the airport authority's efforts to condemn 131 acres of property owned by Lockheed Martin in order to expand the Burbank Airport," the City of Burbank stated in a news release. "No public agency, including the airport authority, has the right to unilaterally decide what laws it will obey and what laws it wiIl disobey," Wigains said. He asked the mayors of Glendale and Pasadena to disavow the airport authority's position and to instruct their appointees to the airport commission to have the aitport authority's attomeys retract the statement. Richard Simon, the airport's attorney, said the airport authority has two pending actions chatlenging the Public Utilities Code. "If the judge orders us to obey it, we will," he said, "but it is our view that it is unconstitutional: '0 Reno-Tahoe Int'1 ; �. �'l . � � � � � •. �'' � � � 1 1 • _� � The Board of the Airport Authority of Washoe County April 17 approved the award of a contract to a local contrac- tor, Fettig Construction, to soundproof an additiona125 homes in a neighborhood southeast of Reno/Tahoe Interna- tional Airport. To date, the airport has insuIated 61 eligibie homes in that area, knows as the Huffaker Hills/Persimmon/Alder Airport Noise Report r i I� c ; ''� ; �: � Apri121,1997 neighborhoods. Sound insulation modifications to homes in the Reno area cost approximately $15,000 -$17,000 per home and can include replacement of windows and exterior doors, air conditioner/heater modifcations, new range hood, and attic insulation. The airport said that measured results indicated that the construction modifications used in the sound insulation prob am have reduced interior noise levels by a minimum of 5 dB. The airport authority has received $1.8 million in Federal Aviation Administration funding for its sound insulation prob am. The airport board atso approved a contract award to Granite Construction Company in the amount of $2.9 million for the construction of a taxiway extension project which will complete dual pazallel taxiway systems and facilitate more e�cient movement of aircraft at the air- field.0 Seattle-Tacoma Int'Z �. � , � . 11- _� � . �� . . � � � • The Environmental Protection Agency has informed the Federal Aviatian Administration that it has "serious reservatians" with the FAA's conciusion that the proposed project to build a new third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport will meet air quality standards. Chuck Clarke, regional Administrator of the EPA's Northwest Region, raised questions concerning the vaIidity of the air quality analysis in the Master Plan Update draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for Sea-Tac airport. The Draft SEIS, released in February, was prepazed by the Port of Seattle and FAA consultants. It discusses proposed options for development at Sea-Tac, included a"Preferred Alternative" calling for the construction of a 8,500-foot long third runway with associate facilides, including a new passenger terminal, additional parking, and other related developments. In his letter to Dennis Ossenkop of t6e FAA's Northwest Re�on, EPA's Clarke said "a few errors appear to have been made which call into question the validity of the position that the Preferred Altemative would produce air quality impacts that weze the same or less than under the Do-Nothing" alternative. He noted three appazent errors in the FAA's analysis: • The use of incorrect factors to model emissions usin� the Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS), a tool used to catculate all direct and indirect emissions at and around an airport; • Failure to include emissions from certain equipment used in the runway construction process in the air quality modeling; and • The underestimation of annual aircraft operation 4S emissions by approximately 9-12 percent in the years 2000, 2005, and 2010. Clarke also noted EPA's concerns regarding the proposed project's compliance with the conformity requirements of the Clear Air Act. Under the act, each state is required to enforce a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to comply with the federal law. Clar}:e wrote that, based on EPA's review of the air quality con'ormity analysis in the DSEIS, "we have serious reservations with the conclusion that the project conforms to tize State Implementation Plan." "Should the final conformity determination significantly differ from the updated confornuty analysis," Clarke continued, "it may be necessary for the FAA to allow for additional public comments on that analysis prior to making a decision:' In particular, he said, an additional public comment period should be considered "if the de minimus thresholds have been exceeded for carbon monoxide and/or oxides of nitrogen." The letter noted that, as a result of apparent errors in the draft 3EIS, minimum thresholds for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxides "would be exceeded in the yeazs 2005 and 2000, respectively, if the Preferred Alternative is implemented." The EPA used the services of an independent air quality consultant, Science Applications International Corp. to review the conformity analysis included in the SEIS. Concerns Being Addressed Mary Vigilante of Synergy Consultants, consultant to the Port, said the air quality analysis is bein; recalculated taking into consideratian EPA's concerns. But, she noted that the kind of revisions being made in the modeling do not result in a radical difference in results. Most airport projects, she said, do not exceed the de minimus thresholds for carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen and she does not expect that the Sea-Tac project will. But, if it does, the Port will do whatever is necessary to bring the project in line with clean air standards, she said. FAA's Ossenkop had no comment on the EPA letter. He said the FAA will respond to the EPA's concerns in the Final SEIS which he expects to be issued in May. ACC Criticism Mike Ruby, an air quality specialist with Environmetrics, a consuitant to the Airport Communities Coalition (ACC), a b oup of five South King County cities suing to black construction of the runway, also noted "significant prob- lems" with the use of computer models used by the SEIS consultants to predict air pollution levels. In a March 27 memorandum, Ruby noted the amount of nitrous oxides levels reported in the SEIS were different than levels the Port's own consultants had estimated using computer models. He pointed out that levels of air pollution caused by veiucle traffic estimated in the SEIS assumed only moving vehicles and did not "include the emissions from idling vehicles stopped at intersections." Ruby estimated that Airport Noise Report 46 Airport Noise Report tra�c delays alon; International Boulevard, a street leading to the airport, alone would result in an increase in NOx emissions of approximately 20 tons per year by the year 2oro. The consultant for the cities also criticized the SEIS for failing to evaluate the amount of pollutants released under the scenario where Sea-Tac airport operated at its ma�cimum projected level of operations, 630,000 per year. Instead, the SEIS assumes only 474,000 operations per year in the year 2010. The Pon of Seattle and FAA wiil issue a final SEIS after public comments on the draft SEIS are reviewed. The Final SEIS wiIl provide the basis for a determination the FAA will render in conjunction with decidinp whether or not to approve the Airport Layout Plan proposed in the SEIS. EPA's.letter also raised the question of whether the _ proposed third runway at Sea-Tac will be eligible for federal fundin� if the Port and FAA aze unabte to meet the confor- miry requirements of the Clear Air Act. Compliance of proposed projects with the State Implementation Plan is a mandatory requirement in order to be eligible to receive federal assistance. The Port has already applied for $267 million in federal funds for the project.� Austin-Bergstrom Int'1 . . . � ;,� . � � � . � r � � , . The City of Austin, TX, and the State of Texas annonnced April 9 a proposed memorandum of understanding under which the state agreed to move its facilities and the Texas Army National Guazd from the soon-to-be-closed Robert Mueller Municipal Airport to the new Austin-Ber?strom International Airport, which is in the process of being converted from a military to a civil airport. The proposed agreernent, which must be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration, would ensure that aircraft operations will cease at the oId airport and that it can be redeveloped when the new airport opens to commercial tc�c in May 1999. T'he state had threatened to reopen Robert Mueller Airport the day after the city plans to close it in order to keep the state's fleet of 20 aircraft based there. Some oeneral aviation operators had also sought to keep the old airport open. But Austin officials dug in their heels and told the state it wouId have to leave Mueller airQort. To avoid Iitigation, the city and state struck a deal. Austin and state officials plan to present the proposed memorandum of understanding to the FA.A for approval in late May, according to John Almond, the new airport project director at the City of Austin New Airport Depar�ent. Under the terms of the proposed memorandum of under- standing, the state agreed to move its administrative facilities at the oid airport to the new airport and to work with the City of Austin to redevelop the old airport site into more compatible use. No decision has been made yet rejardinD how the land on which Mueller sits will be redeveloped, according to Almond, but it is possible that new state office buildings could be constructed there, he said. The proposed memoran- dum of understanding allows the state to purchase up to 282 acres of land at the Mueller airport site. The City of Austin has agreed to purchase 20 acres that the state owns at the otd airport at an estimated cost of $S million. The state also has a�reed to lease 13 acres of land on the north end of the new airport for $1 per acre per year and to construct its own facilities at the new airport at state expense. The City of Austin will provide about $3 rnillion for public infrastructure at the site. The Texas Army National Guazd will relocate to the new airport also. The guazd's non-aviation operations at the old airport will continue unti12012 when its lease ends. On July 1, Fed Ex and Burlington will begin cazgo operations at the new airport but there will be less than 15 flights per day, according to Jamy Kazanoff of the City of Austin New Airport Department. The airport will not open to commercial traffic until May 1999. The new airport includes a new 9,000 foot runway which is pointed at two elementary schools and a high school. The city bought these schools to keep them out of the flight path of the new runway, Kazanoff said. The high school was not even in the noise footprint, she noted. Federal �ants provided funding to purchase the elementary schools which were in z.ye footprint.0 United Bingdom �� 'i� ii• � � r � r � r, ,� � _ � . � . ,�. Fearing they are about to be evicted from a tree-top camp they set up in January following approval of a new second runway at Manchester Airport in England, members of a group opposed to the runway are preparing to move into a system of under�ound tunnels they have dug by hand in an effort to foiI the airport's attempts to remove them from the site. The non-vioient aaemlla warfare tactics of the Coalitian Against Runway 2(CAR2), designed to capture the atten- tion of the press, are doing just that, according to a spokes- man for the group named Tim, who declined to aive his last name. He said that the story of the tree-top protesters has been covered widely in England and Europe. The scene at the new runway site looks like a prisoner-of- war camp, he said, describing the razor-sharp fence topped with bazbed wire the airQort has built around the new runway site, enclosing the protesters, and the security guazds manning it. CARZ members had been tearing down portions of the fence at night, but it is now bathed in flood light to prevent any more such sabotage. Perhaps starting to feel a bit like a like a prisoner of waz himseif, Tim asserted that it's against the Geneva Conven- Airport Noise Report � i i Apri121,1997 47 tion to erect such a fence. Airport officials say the fence is only temporary and its erection is part of the runway construction process. Noise is not the driving issue in this airport runway battle. Rather it is disiIlusionment with the public process of approving the new runway and concerns about the impact of aircraft emissions on global warming and local health. CARZ members are also trying to save two old forests, habitat to many rare bird species, that will have to be cut down to make way for the new runway. "The so-called democratic process is widely flawed," Tim told ANR. "The whole system is a fazce." He was referring to a decision by a Public Inquiry Inspector which concluded that the new ranway project, expected to bring jobs to the depressed Manchester azea, should go forwazd even thouDh it was an inappropriate development for a a eenfield site. Thus faz, three o oups in the United States in the Seattle, Baltimore, and Chicago areas, concerned about airport environmental issues have voiced support for the Manch- ester protesters, according to Nicola Francis-Burnell of West Harwick, MA, the sister of one of the Manchester protesters. She is the author of a press release to U.S. a oups seeking their assistance. . New Jobs The airport predicts that the new runway will generate 50,000 new jobs in the region and encourage investment in the northwestern part of England. CARZ disputes these figures, contending the runway will result in very few new jobs. " Regarding the placement of the airport, Roz Hughes, public relations manager for the Manchester Airport, said "the site and design for the runway was carefully chosen to avoid the maximum amount of disruption to the local community and the environment " The runway will be two miles long. Over half of the site is within the airport's existing boundaries. Beyond these boundaries there will be 62 acres of new concrete, she said. Over 300 acres will be set aside for landscaping, recreadon, and ecolo�cal areas. A 15-yeaz management plan will be put into effect to protect and improve over 850-acres of local countryside around the airport, according to an airport press release. It said that "mitigation proposals that will reguiate the construction and final appearance of Runway 2 have been drawn up to provide an inteb ated landscape and nature conservation package that is sympathetic to the character of the surrounding azea." The airport intends to create new woodlands that will be "planted with species that reflect those that are locally native and will incorporate soil and ground fiora from the woodlands being replaces." The airport noted that the legally binding agreements have been signed with the council for Cheshire County, into which the airport will expand, restricting further develop- ment of the airport and barring any more new runways. Hughes noted that the airport already has a voluntary restriction on night flights. 5he also said it is worth noting that a large number of the protesters trespassing on the new runway site did not participate in the public inquiry process. Out on a Limb On Jan. 15, the British secretaries of Transport and the Environment gave p;anning approval for the new runway. On Jan. 25, the activ�sts went up the trees and out on a limb — literally — to protest the runway. "About 15 of us were sitting around one night talking about the new runway and decided to climb the trees," Tim explained. About 70 people are now living in the tree camp. Many are not full-time protesters. They take time off to go to work or to go home at night, but they are tenacious. Tim said he has been fired from his job as a student teacher because of his activity. � The opponents of the runway project aze seeking review of the planning approvaI process, but time is runnina out for them. On April 10, a Manchester court approved a request by the Manchester Airport, Tarmac Construction Ltd., and Amec Civil Engineering Ltd. to evict the protesters from the runway construction site. The following day, CAR2 appealed that order. No hearing date has been set yet. The airport would not comment on its strategy for evicting the protesters, but the process is expected to begin shortly. So soon the arboreal activists may have to give up the high b ound in their battle against the airport and become subterranean tunnel troopers to thwart construction of the runway. • Having �ven verity to the term `tree hugaers', the protesters are about to do the same for the expression `last ditch effort'.0 San Diego Int'1 �, �I� , �' t I ( j � � III�� II, The Port of San Diego recently honored 18 of the 26 airlines serving Lindbergh Field for complying last year with the Port's Airpon Use Regulations, which require a more ag�essive phaseout of Stage 2 aircraft than the federal schedule and impose time of day restrictions on aircraft operations. The Port's Airport Use Regulations were adopted in 1988, prior to passage of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, which established a federal schedule for phasing out Stage 2 aircraft by the end of 1999 and required airports to subject proposed airport noise and capacity restrictions to a stringant cosUbenefit analysis. The Port's restrictions were among those of several airports grandfathered under the act. "The Port District and the community appreciate the efforts made by the airlines to comply with the Airport Use Regulations," said Danette Lake, director of the Airport Noise Information Office at Lindbergh Field. "I am pleased that the air carriers continue to meet and exceed the strict Stage 3 aircraft requirements." Aiiport Noise Report 48 Airport Noise Report ANR EDITOF�IAL AI)VISORY BOARD Mark Atwood, Esq. Galland, Kharasch, Morse & G�nkle Washington. D.C. Lee L. Blackman, Fsq. McDermott, Will & Emery Los Angeies, Calif. Dr. Clifford R. Bragdon, AICP Dean, School of Aviation & Transportadon Dowling Coilege Eliot Cutler, Esq. Cuder & Stanfieid Washington, D.C. J. Spencer Dickerson Senior Vice President American Associadon of Airport Execudves Edward J. DiPolvere Administrator, National Associadon of Noise Controi Officials Richard G. "Dick" Dyer Airport Environmental Specialis4 Division of Aeronautics, Calif. Dept. of Transportation E. Tazewell Ellett, Esq. Hogan & Hartson Washington, D.C. Julie H. Ellis, Fsq. Managing Director Federai Express Corpomtion � Angel M. Garcia Co-Chairman Cidzens Against Newark Noise E.H. "Moe" Haupt Manager, Airport and Environmentai Services. Nadonai $usiness Aircraft Association Robert P. Silverberg, Esq. Bagileo, Siivezberg & Goldman Washington. D.C. Joanne W. Young, Esq. Baker & Hostedar LLP Washington, D.C. In recoanition of their accomplishment, the Port District's Airport Noise Advisory Committee presented Airport Use Regulations Compli- ance Awards to Aeromexico, Alaska, American, British Airways, Frontier, Midwest Express, Northwest, and Reno Air. Commuter aircraft operators awarded for being in compliance with the re�ulations were American Eajle, Trans States, and Skywest. Cargo carriers found in compliance with the use restrictions were Airborne Express, Burlington, Emery Worldwide, Everb een International, Federal Express, Ryan •International, and United Parcel Service. Some 91.9 percent of the operations by airlines serving Lindbergh Field during 1996 were conducted with quieter Stage 3 aircraft. This percentage is well above the national average of 70 percent Stage 3 operations reported by the FAA last yeaz. The Port's Airport Use Regulations require the use of 90 percent Stage 3 aircraft in 1997, 95 percent in 1998, and 100 percent in 1999 and after.� Conferences � /' � � � �' I� � ' � ,� � ' � � � ' �' � i The Institute of Noise Control Engineering (II�tCE) will present a seminar entitled Recent Developments in Transportation Noise on June 13-14 at the Nittany Lion Inn on the campus of The Pennsylvania State University in State College, PA. The seminar will immediately precede NOISE-CON 97, the 1997 National Confezence on Noise Control Engineering, which will be held at Penn State on June 15-17. The Acoustical Society of America will also hold its semi-annual meering at Penn State on 7une 16-20. The goal of the INCE seminar on transportation noise is to a ve attendees a knowledge of modern techniques used to determine whether noise control measures are needed and to Iughliaht the methods that can he used to predict and mitigate environmental noise from transportation noise sources. � The seminar will be tau�ht by Carl Hanson, Andrew Hazris, and Christopher Menge of the acoustical consulting firm Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, Inc. The fee for the course is $595 for those who aze not members of INCE and $525 for INCE members. For additional information on the seminaz, contact INCE at tel: (914) 462-4006; fax (914) 463-0201.� • ' � � ' � ' ' � ' Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Marguerite Lambert, Production Coordinator Charles F. Price, Cbntributing Editor; Anne Jacobs, Circulation Editor; Maria T. Norton, Production Editor . Pubiished 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 Aiiport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of U5$1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 2'7 Congress Street, Salem, MA 01970. USA. Copyright O 1997 by Airporc Noise Report, Ashburn, Va. 22a i 1 _.... .._._�___...._...�.........»..____"____,......._..........�....w.......,._.:,,.�+�nes�ruoc��i:t.�i:,:;.�.;_uo-: .:: ..:... ..::�.. _.......:�.�c.....,..c�:t:,:i:>...._..,:...�..bL...32.'2Rf..a��a�ttttv,..,s3� .;. ._.• .:,. •., . :•...-.:,�,.... ..,. . ..�, • r,. ..,.., . . f ^ n . . . 1 r' � ,: L�J �\ W � } o O.Od'M d Nt��MeN-��TI�N N Q \, �... - . . . _.... _ .. ........... �.:.: v...�u �.•�...::..: �H1��vs. \ 0 i i i i i i�0 N � �i- r W � } O p�j �t7��N(��ON�� i d' � Ci? i CO �o 0 �•0 ��- e- M �� CV � cy � I� n1 f�. Cr� t- Q 'a' � �c- � � C� � � � MM� ' t�� i iIN m i � c 0 � m � `� ', C� o m � o � ��c�i��-� °� ��v�iNcYi�UUUC,�j �Cn LL Cn h C� 1� i� Q� C� � C� L� Q Cpm�N�NIt� ct'Mr-tyCV� � 0 — O O O O � Q� �t'� �7' C*� �� * � � � � � � ti ti � � � � � o 0 � � M � ,.�y _ R < � 0 6 o` u :L ;j rT� V/ � �� C \ 0 O M >, N � � �X 0 � � � � 0 � � -� a� � � Q� L U .� � t6 � N m t6 � C N � a� Q a� rn � .� � � a� � � � � � �o o � (n L � O Z � � � �� OD 00 d' � O � Cfl �� d' M M tS� OOI �.t� N U N � Q � z Cfl N O tt� �- d- N d- M d- d-I � LL d' � O � p O (�6 � (V � M �.t� N Q � � � � � � �.d UUUN�j � ti � � � ti � � � � � � � p o 0 � CU M M C (; C. ;, � \ O (3� M � 00 � � N � O � � � O � M � M Q � � N °O � � � � rn � o; � M N �r'� � 0 0 0 � o i e r' CO t'� 'Ct N N t�- � S-- M � � C Q� 0 �� t0 ta CO N �.Y) d' � N t� t,�� t,�f) CNO � C�O_ Q 0 � �a-+ � � � 0 V � � rn rn rn CTi a� � c a� rn rn c� a� rn Q T r' � s— r � 'a C � 0 � 0 U h 0 � � 0 O CO '� C � Q O 0 � C N � N � � m O � c� � '� ttf O � C �' N � � � � z a t�- � r �� N � (�7 � �1 .�. � 4� 0 � t6 0 d' N >, .i� � > a� N � �O C N U � � � N � O � 'C � N � �O .F.. � � � a� -� •� � � N � N �E O ;�.., N � N � .Q � � �. � •� z :� r � � � ❑ � � � � N rn � L � � � � O � G �'' Q L � � �O Q� W Q � ^ A � � O U O v� � � � � � O � O .� = U� � `C � � � U � � � � � � cu ° v o 0 O '� � O m � M � � O � � � � tQ � C LZ. O _ 0 � o �' � O O � � 0 � � � � Q' (fi � � � N � � � � � � � r�-• f� C Q U = V -�-• � � •� � c c°.�� O O� O O V � N � N � �t6 a� a� � a� a� _ L� L y..i L L Q� Q� � �% d% � � � � � � � Q Q � Q Q � 'S S' rn S S� � zz�azzo � � � � N � � � ❑ r�%� .� Q � � .�.: N � N (6 � � � O N t6 � m � r (� �' � � � �� O uJ ��- O ttT �� ,N � lA �� .O v= N � � � Q � � � c -� ai � a�i O � O 'p N � � O N � � � O N � 'Q � O � '� � t�6 t � ''"' Q cn i � � »-• Z o � � "� N N •� � � � � CZ � O tII � p� td' � � � � Z � � O � � '� � �� Q � O tA t� Q CU Q U) � � � � � � � ❑ ��( 0 L � � ` 0 � Q U C � 0 � �1-+ � � � �� .:.. � � �O � �o � � � � N �- � O M ,� O O p �� O,,r j� .m N � � -'� •-;• � .,... � ,O � O � N `+-'�' Q- O � .� � t6 � coc' cu,r•� �� N �' N � � � � L •� � •� 'a N = �� Q,� !�^ � � V! > � > U � z .� o � tD � � T C 0 �_ �.. . C �; ' ` �: �;,If; r�y,:� �,>..,�1 a• »>. +`�,i. 15' l��`�? „�, AGENDA - ��f 4:.;' �r �'.� REGULAR MEETING D � �'� �A�° � '`,�` EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS CO�TMISSION �:��` ;��;�. � r9,�� , EAGAN, MINNESOTA ;��``,� ., .1: �''�y�A. ,', YF,�'��wV� � EAGAN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ��.4� May 15,1997 7:00 P.M. ,� : : � : ��, �, � : �. II. APPROVAL OF MYN[TTES 1 1' 1: 1 �'1 rv� ��„�;rEN'�'�,. �'�t31�T A. Northwest Airlines Fleet Plans, Stage III Conversion, Employment and Future Planning - Jennifer Sayre NWA Representative V. OLD BUSI2�TESS A. Noise Abatement Departure Profiles - John Foggia, MAC VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. WORKSHOF REPORT VIII. STAFF REPORT A. Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor B. MASAC Update C. Northern Dakota County Airport Relations Coalition IX. INFORMATIVE X. FUTURE AGENDA �i. iV11:�`i` e:t7lVf1Y'y3S�lOI�7 MEETING - 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, June 10 NEXT COMMISSION WORKSHOP - 7:00 p.m. Thursday, May 22 NEXT MA.SAC MEETING - 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 27 1 • 1 1 ' I Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will a#empt to provide such aid. I C