The URL can be used to link to this page

Dual Track Airport Plng Process Scoping Decision July 1995'i .� . � . . � � , � � . � � � � � . . ' . , . , • . � � �, �;� . . �_��, � , � , � Prepared by HNTB Corporation and Associated Firms The dual track airport planning process mandated by the 1989 Minnesota Legislature is designed to determine the major airport development options in the region for the year 2020 and their consequences. One track addresses ways to provide the needed capacity and facilities at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The other track provides the needed capacity and facilities at a potential replacement airport in the designated search area in Dakota County. CERTIFICATION BY RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT � •.�L�-�i5 Date Approved Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director, Planning and Environment For additional information, contact the following persons: Mr. Nigel Finney Mr. Glen Orcutt Metropolitan Airports Commission Federal Aviation Administration 6040 - 28th Avenue South 6020 - 28th Avenue South, Suite 102 Minneapolis, MN 55450 Minneapolis, MN 55450 Telephone: (612) 726-8187 Telephone: (612) '725-4367 �. i ' 1 1 � TABLE OF CONTENTS ExecutiveSummary . . .. . .. . . . . ..... .. .......... .. ....... ......... . ... . .. . ... ... .. ... .... .. ........ .......... ...... i I. Introduction .... ............. ..... . . .......... ........... .... ............... .. ........ .....................1 Purpose of Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 ' Proposed Project . . . .. ... . . . . . .....:.... . . . . .... . ..... ...... . .... ... . . . .... .... ..... . .. .... .............. .1 Schedule... ....... ........... . . . . . ........ . . ... ........ .... . ... . . . ... . . . . . ..... . . . ... ... . ... . ......... ..... 2 II. Altematives ............................................................................................... 3 � III. Analysis of Issues and Impacts . . ... . ... . ..... ... . . .... .. . .... . . . . . ..... .. . . .. ... . . . .... . .............. 9 ', A. Issues and Impacts Requiring Detailed Analysis ..........................................9 B. Issues and Impacts Not Requiring Detailed Analysis ...................................25 IV. Public and Agency Involvement .................................................................... 26 Public and Agency Involvement ..............................................................:..... 26 Scoping Public Meetings ............................................................................. 26 Appendix A- Revisions to Second Phase Scoping Report ............................................. A-1 Appendix B- Summary of Comments on the Second Phase Scoping Report and Responses ... B-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1- Location Map ................................................................................... 5 Figure2 - MSP Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 3- New Airport Alternative ....................................... ............................... 7 Figure 4- No Action Alternative ................................ ... ....... ............................... 8 1 ;'. Scoping Decision Egecutive Summary Purpose of the Document The Dual Track process created by the Minnesota Legislature in 1989 directed the Metiopolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and the Metropolitan Council (MC) to examine how best to meet the region's aviation demand 30 years into the future. The agencies were directed to compare expansion of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) with construction of a new replacement airport. The state aaid federal Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for the Dual Track process which are . being prepared by MAC and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), will compare those and all other feasible alternatives to meet 2020 aviation demand in light of a host of environmental criteria. The scoping process creates a blueprint for the EIS, identifying development alternatives and environmental issues that will be analyzed in the EIS. The scoping process for the EIS was performed in two phases. In April 1992 a First Phase Scoping Report was prepared which described the Dual Track process for identifying the alternatives and issues/impacts to be addressed in the EIS. The Second Phase Scoping Report identif'ied these alternatives and issues and was released in May for public comment. The public commented on the scoping report at meetings on June 26 and June 21; agencies commented at a separate meeting on June 27. MAC reviewed these comments and made its scoping decision at a special meeting July 26. Scoping Decision The development altematives that will be analyzed in the Environ.mental Impact Statement are expansion of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, construction of a new airport in Dakota County, and no action. Two other alternatives -- a remote runway concept and supplemental use of other state airports -- are being studied to determine if they should be included in the EIS. Those studies will be completed in the summer of 1995. A sixth alternative, high-speed intercity rail between the Twin Cities and Chicago, was examined but will not be included in the EIS. The concept will not be included because it does not divert enough passengers and operations by the year 2020 to preclude a new runway and terminal at the Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport. Thirty different environmental issue/impact categories were examined to determine if more detailed analysis is necessary in the EIS. They are: air quality, archaeological resources, biotic communities, bird-aircraft hazards, construction impacts, coastal barriers, coastal zone management program, endangered and threatened species, economic, energy supply and natural resources, farmland, floodplains, historic/architectural resources, induced socioeconomic impacts, land use, light emissions, noise, parks and recreation, site preservation, social, section 4(�, solid waste, transportation access, major utilities, visual impacts, wastewater, water supply, surface water quality, groundwater quality, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, and wildlife refuges. �' ; � Of these, four environmental categories will not require further detailed analysis in the EIS because it was determined that thei�r impacts aze not significant or relevant. They are coastal bazriers, coastal zone management program, mineral resources and solid waste. The Process The MAC will follow the Scoping Decision as it prepares a draft state/federal Environmental Impact Statement for public and agency review. Below is a schedule of highlights of the remainder of the Dual Track EIS process: MAC and FAA make draft EIS available for public and agency comment � Dec. 4, 1995 Public comment period Dec. 4, 1995-Feb. 5, 1996 Public hearings/information meetings January 1996 MAC prepares state final EIS March 1996 MEQB determines adequacy of state final EIS May 1996 MAC/MC recommendations to Minnesota Legislature July 1, 1996 ii ' � � , ,' ,� ��. PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT The purpose of the Scoping Decision is to present the alternatives, issues and impact categories that the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and the Federai Aviation Adrsinistration (FAA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation propose to study, analyze and discuss in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the dual track airport planning process. The EIS is being conducted in accordance with the Alternative Environmental Review Process approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Boazd (MEQB) on 1Viarch 19, 1992, and in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration Order 5050.4A issued October 8, 1985 by FAA. Campliance with FAA Order 5050.4A ensures that the project will meet the procerlural and substandve environmental requirements set forth by the Council on Environmental Quality in its regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. MAC is the designatecl Responsible Governmental Unit (RGtn for the scoping documents and the state EIS. FAA is responsible for the federal EIS. Contact Persons: Mr. Nigel Finney Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 (612) 726-8187 '.' �_��_ 1 . � � Mr. Glen Orcutt Federal Aviation Administradon 6020 28th Avenue South, Suite 102 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 (612)725-4367 The proposed project is the airport development plan that best accommodates the year 2020 air transportation neecis of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The plan consists of the runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal(s), concourses, roadways, building areas, maintenance and treatment facilides, and supporting local and regional infrastructure improvements. -1- _ _ _ r i � i i The following is the tentative schedule of remaining activities for the dual track airport planning process: ; I i i, , �; Activity Date Draft EIS and Beginning of Comment Period December 4, 1995 Draft EIS Public �-Iearingslinformation Meetings January 1996 End of Draft EIS Comment Period February 5, 1996 State Final EIS Mazch ]996 MEQB Determination of State Final EIS Adequacy May 1996 Recommendations to Minnesota Legislature July l, 1996 j(!, After the Minnesota �.,eg��lature selec�s an airport development alternative, the FAA will prepare the federal Final EIS based or� �he selected alternative. ,, '':' d� The following alternatives are proposed for further study, analysis and evaluation in the EIS. The location of the alternatives under consideration is shown in �gure l(following this section). Alternative 1- MSP Expansion � j Tfie MSP alternative, shown in Figure 2, consists of the existing airport facilities, the construction of Runway 422 extension, construction of a new 8,000-foot north/south runway and a new replacement ternzinal building on the west side of MSP, and a parking/drop-off facility on tt�e east side of the airport for ricketed passengers with carry-on baggage. Ground transportation access will be provided from T.H. 77 and T.H. 62 to the new west-side entrance of the terminal. Alternative 2 - New Airport The New Airport alternative, shown in �gure 3, consists of the acquisition of about 14,100 acres in Dakota County, the construction of six runways, terminal, taxiways, internal roadways, building areas, support facilities, parking and new highway access from the new airport to the regional highway system. Alternative 3 - No Action I'' The No Action Alternative consists of the existing airport facilities and access at MSP (]�'igure 4), and those committed projects with funding approvetl by the Commission in its current Capital Improvement Program. The comrnitted major projects are: • New Federal Inspection Services and supporting improvements on the Gold Concourse • Expanded elevation roadway • New Sun Country hangar • Expanded Ground Transportation Center • Auto Rental Parking Expansion • Runway 4-22 extension (shown in �gure 4) and supporting taxiway improvements Other Alternatives Two other alternatives are currently being studied as potentially feasible for meeting the air transportation needs of the region in the year 2020 (as defined in Section I�. The studies will be completed in the summer of 1995. If the alternatives are determined feasible, they will be included in the EIS for detailed evaluation. -3- The alternatives are: A. Remote Runway Concept 'This alternative would retain the ticketing, baggage and support facilities at MSP, construct new gates and runways at a remote location (15-25 miles from MSP), and construct a high-speed transit link between the existing terminal and the new gates. The purpose of this altemative is to retain the e�sting goad ground accessibility and development related to the existing airport, and move the existing and future noise impacts and runway capacity needs to a remote lucation. B. Supplemental Airport Concept This alternative would retain all of the existing and committed facilities at MSP, utilize the existing runways/facilities at an existing airport in the state for some of the MSP operations, and construct a high-speed transit link between MSP and the supplemental airport. The purpose of this alternative is to retain the existing good ground accessibility and development related to the airport, and relocate some MSP operations to a supplemental airport (e.g., Rochester, St. Cloud, St. Paul Downtown) such that additional runways would not be required at MSP. , ;� j � I' :� � � � �%'° I�I��F.��i�''��s..� � � � - . , o ; � . :.-�.�> ( ' .� � `� ..�-< J... ��,r� t, � ..:_.. � • �� ..� U � � Q) // ' �� .� ,a�'(u � (� • �� - ---�...� .1. � 0 �/��i�� ,!� � �� . � _ �� 'r► - _- ' _ ; ' ��'—` %9 'Q A Q �� •. � �� '� o � p , p �/ %',� :: � c� �� . ►� ' r �' '� ' � � � � �', ,.� . '��', ,� . '-..-I. � � .-.�� - ! _ �-,�� , . ',,�' ,-� = . 1 W � ��.. ►��I/ � - . r �ii.:�..:...►:t�►_*► �---...■.t /' �' ' �: � u m � Z _T m � z _ m � � 0 N Q�°` ��rs'�e � � -(-�� -� . yN�A M[ ROP�� c 0 �� .� � 0 rn c .Q 0 � � t/) w � u� a�i U U i a III. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES AND IIVY�ACTS A. Issues and Impacts Requiring Detailed Analysis The following environmental issues and impact categories are determined to be potentially significant and to require detailed analysis in the EIS. Measures to mitigate the potential impacts will be discussed, where appropriate. The area of potential effect (APE) for the environmental issues and impact categories are defined in Section V of the Second Phase Scoping Report. Non environmental issues (e.g., ability to finance a new airport) will be addressed in a companion document, Alternative Evaluation Technical Report. Air Quality Major Sources of Pollutants to Be F�aluated in the EIS On-airport sources On-airport sources include aircraft and support equipment, motor vehicles, and stationary sources ��I such as power plants, incinerators, and fuel storage facilities. Those aircraft operations which ' are the major contributors to ground level concentrations of pollutants are taxiing and queuing for takeoff although the takeoff roll also contributes a small amount. Emissions associated with �i aircraft support equipment are also taken into account. Emissions from motor vehicles occur on � roadways as well as in parking lots and ramps on the airport. 'The location of stationary sources including power plants, boilers, incinerators, and fuel storage facilities can also contribute to the overall concentrations at on- and off-airport receptor sites. Off'-airport sources Off-airport sources are defined here as motor vehicle traffic on regional roadways which may carry tra�c destined to or from the EIS alternatives. The regional roadway network used for this analysis has been developed by the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council and includes primary roadways on the network. Since major at-grade intersections are the primary sources of CO emissions, these will be addressed in the EIS. Methodology and Assumptions Liaison with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, and Wisconsin DNR will help establish assumptions and identify receptor sites to be used in air quality modeling. CO and other criteria pollutant emissions and concentrations will be estimated for on-aisport sources using the FAA Fmissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) airport air pollution model. Aircraft operations in the year 2020 will be evaluated using aircraft and engine categories � ,i i� ; expected in the 2020 time period including re-engined DC-9s, if appropriate. On-airport motor (� vehicle activity will be based upon airport roadways and parking facilities. It will be assumed in � I the EIS that any new terminal and associated roadways will be designed to ensure compliance with air quality standards. Stationary sources will include expected fuel storage and on-airport �"'� utilities. Annual meteorological data from 1992 will be used to estimate annual, 24-hour (TSP), j� 8-hour (CO), 3-hour (HC and SOx), and 1-hour (CO and NOx) cc�ncentrations. � Annual CO, total VOC (volatile organic compounds), HC, and NOx emissions will be estimated i i for off-airport traffic that is associated with the airport. These estimates will be derived from traffic volumes on Metropolitan Council regional highway network model and the EDMS model. '' Pollutant concentrations derived from the EDMS model for receptor sites located in the vicinity of each EIS alternative will be considered. This modeling will build upon the preliminary work , already completed for the MSP LTCP AED and New Airport Comprehensive Plan AED. Only j', receptor sites in Minnesota and adjacent areas of Wisconsin that are expected to exist in the year � 2020 will be evaluated. �'; CO is the only pollutant for which a microscale air quality analysis will be performed for off- ' airport sources. For the microscale analysis, vehicle emissions will be projected using the ;- , MOBILE SA emissions model (adjusted to the appropriate regional vehicle mix in Minnesota er 1� Wisconsin). CO concentrations will be estimated using the CAL3QHC highway queuing and dispersion model. Air quality guidelines established by the Metropolitan Council will be used to identify critical intersections for which a microscale CO analysis will be performed based on � i information from the regional highway network. Intersections will be screened on the basis of the volume and percentage of airport-related tra�c handled and the expected level of service with this tra�c. The objective of the CO analysis is to assess compliance with state and federal ambient i CO standards. A reiizied analysis will be performed for those intersections already evaluated in � the New Airport Site Selection AED and the MSP LTCP AED. Background CO concentrations from the New Airport Site Selection AED and the MSP LTCP AED will be used to determine overall CO concentrations. Background levels of other criteria pollutants will be based upon available monitoring data or estimated from emissions data where feasible. Dust and construction emissions will be addressed in the EIS. The level of this analysis or discussion will be established through liaison with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency staff. Consistency with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and conformity with the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 will be addressed in the EIS. The potential for mitigation of emissions and concentrations for stationary and mobile sources ; both on and off the airport will be addressed for each EIS alternative. These measures may i, ' include changes in technology for stationary and mobile sources as well as changes in aircraft operations and tra�c management programs. Examples of mitigation strategies to be examined ! are: j� � Airport ground access and distribution (transit, people movers, etc.) New aircraft engine technologies New energy-efficient and emission-efficient stationary facilities Archaeological Resources MSP Alternative Undisturbed/minimally-undisturbed portions within the property needed for the MSP Alternative do not contain any archaeological sites that are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Built-up/paved portions which have not yet been accessible for archaeological survey will need to be reviewed in accordance with a comprehensive research design still to be developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation O�ce (SHPO): a memorandum of agreement which will state when and how archaeologically sensitive areas will be investigated during future modifications of the existing facilities. New Airport Four archaeological properties identified within the progosed new airport boundaries will be I' i subjected to intensive survey (evaluation) during 1995. Reconnaissance survey, if necessary -- � supplemented by evaluative survey, will focus on access roads not covered by previous archaeological surveys, all in accordance with a research design which will be submitted to SHPO I; for approval prior to the irutiation of field work. Methodology and findings will be described in a ! technical report which specifies whether any of the inventoried archaeological resources are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Biotic Communities In the Biotic Communities section, the EIS will discuss in more detail the biotic communities potentially affected by each of the three alternatives being considered. Since other sections of the EIS will provide detailed analyses of threatened and endangered species, wedands and bird- aircraft impacts, the Biotic Communities section will address all other ecological features not covered in the other sections. Bird Aircraft Hazards The EIS will include a detailed analysis of potential bird aircraft iiazards associated with the three alternatives being analyzed. Existing data on migratory bird numbers and movements at identified bird concentration areas are being supplemented with more intensive field surveys during the Spring 1995 migration season. Each alternative will be re-analyzed using the same methodology applied in the AEDs for the M5P and New Airport I.ong-Term Comprehensive Plans. Integrated Noise Model (INM) data will again be used to obtain typical departure flight profiles for the various flight tracks associated with each runway for each alternative. The standard instrument -11- 'i; glide path will be used to develop approach profiles. The bird aircraft hazard analysis contained in the EIS will address all flight tracks associated with the various alternatives and will include any flight track refinements that may be developed as the design process proceeds. The most cunent MAC aircraft operation projections will be used in the analysis. For any flight tracks potentially involving a significant bird-aircraft conflict, mitigation measures will also be explored. Construction Impacts Environmental impacts during construction that are potentially significant will be addressed. Economic The costs of developing each alternative, including estimates of land acquisition and construction, will be detailed. Standardized cost factors used in other capital projects, including airport projects, will be used to formulate these estimates. Relocation costs will be determined according to provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. Potential funding sources and potential financing mechanisms for airport development will be spelled out. The availability of funds and the feasibility of these financing mechanisms will be explored. The tax capacity of properties displaced by airport development will be detailed, and the reduction in tax revenues of local jurisdictions will be determined. Endangered and Threatened Species The EIS will include a detailed anaiysis of potential threatened and endangered species impacts associated with the three alternatives being analyzed. Additional coordination will be undertaken with the Minnesota DNR Nongame Wildlife Program to obtain the most up-to-clate information of occurrences of threatened, endangered and special concerns. For the MSP Alternative, the EIS will include a more detailed analysis of potential impacts to Forster's terns in Mother Lake. The distribution of cunent and historic Forster's tern breeding activity within Mother Lake will be explored to further define the relationship of fill and structures to the portions of the lake receiving use for nesting. Based on this information, the EIS will contain a refined analys'is of potential impacts to Forster's tern habitat and movements at Mother Lake. For both the MSP and No Action Alternatives, the EIS will re-analyze potential disturbance impacts to a bald eagle breeding territory existing within Long Meadow Lake in the Minnesota Valley Nationa] Wildlife Refuge. For the New Airport Alternative, the EIS will re-analyze potential disturbance impacts to all elements of essential bald eagle habitat (i.e. breeding tenitories or winter night roosts) existing along the Mississippi River adjacent to the New Airport -12- site. The re-analyses of potential bald eagle impacts will be carried out using the same methodolop,y applied in the A�Ds for the MSP and New Airport Long-Term Comprehensive Plans and will use the latest data on eagle habitat use and any refinements to previously analyzed flight tracks and projections of aircraft operations. In order to estimate the minunum distance (considering both altitude and horizontal distance) at which corrimercial aircraft would pass near each essential habitat element, an Integrated Noise Model (INM) analysis will carried out for each departure flight track. The standard instnunent glide path will be used to deternune approach profiles for the same purpose. The three alternatives will be analyzed based on the proximity of essential habitat elements to overflights, the projected number of such overflights and approximate disturbance thresholds derived from the scientific literature. The EIS will analyze in detail the �potential for impacts to loggerhead shri.kes associated with the New Airport Alternative. Existing data on shrike breeding territories will be supplemented with new data collected during the 1995 breeding season. The anticipated impacts to these temtories will be analyzed in detail based on grading concepts for the New Airport site and the proximity of these territories to future airport faci�ities. The EIS will also expand upon the potential mitigation measures described in the AED for the New Airport Comprehensive Plan. The EIS will also describe threatened and endangered plant species at Chimney Rock which would be incorporated within airport property to foster their preservation. � Energy Supply and Natural Resources �- �a !�� u�, . :•� i� �-: -. ;�. � .i- :�[•� Energy issues to be addressed and analyzed in the EIS include: • Energy consumption by aircraft within the regional airspace (arrival/departure) • Energy consumption by aircraft on the ground (taxi/takeoff/landing) o Energy consumption by fixed sources on airport (boilers/utilities/etc.) + Energy consumption by fixed sources off airport (energy suppliers) o Energy consumption by mobile sources on airport (equipment/motor vehicles) • Energy consumption by mobile sources off airport (motor vehicles) Annual aircraft energy requirements within the regional airspace will be estimated based upon typical origins and destinations. Aircraft energy requirements on the airport will be estimated based upon typical taxi times and delays from queing for each of the EIS alternatives. I, Energy requirements for stationary facilities on the airport will be identified. Power companies or � i other suppliers of energy will be contacted to determine how projected demands can be met by existing or new facilities. For vehicular traffic (ground access), annual vehicle miles of travel of airport-related traffic will be translated into annual regional fuel consumption for each EIS alternative. 'This will be based upon traffic volumes on the Metropolitan Council regional highway network model. -13- jj Mitigation of energy consumption through the use of energy-efficient designs, traffic management and energy-efficient aircraft operations will be discussed in the EIS. Farmland � The economic impacts arising from the loss of farm producdon in Dakota County on the rest of r the county, the state, the region and the nation will be detennined. This will include, but not � 1�' necessarily be limited to, determining the impacts on agriculture-serving businesses and industries, particularly those in the general vicinity of the new airport site. '' The relationship between development of the new airport alternative and the Familand Protection Policy Act will be explored. This will involve an assessment of soils, both prime farniland and farmland of statewide importance, as classified by the federal Soil Conservation Service, to �� determ.ine the applicability of the act to the new airport alternative. The potential for farming on remnant fields available for farm operations once the airport is constructed will be analyzed. Floodplains/Hydrology The existing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC-2 model of the Vermillion River wil] be used to �; estimate the change in stage within the Vermillion River for the discharge from the airport site for i' a 100-year flood event. This will provide information on the incre_nental effect of the new airport as compared to conditions used to establish the existing 100-year flood elevations. The results ( �,I will be presented graphically showing the water surface profile with and without the proposed airport facility from the proposed auport to the most downstream location within the existing model. Historic/Architectural Resources MSP and No Action Altematives i' The historic significance of above-ground properties within the known Area of Potential Effect �_� (APE) for the MSP alternative has been determined by a previous survey. An assessment must be completed, however, on the irnpact of the "no action" alternativ�. The APE for tlus alternative will consist of the existing airport property and the associated DNL 65 noise contour for the year �! 2005. A number of properties in the APE have been evaluated by previous surveys; this information will be reviewed, and additional reconnaissance and intensive-level survey will be �. completed as necessary. Ti�e project research design and recommendations for intensive-level I', survey will be reviewed and approved by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The iu�al technical report will describe the survey's methodology and findings, including a list of properties in the APE that are listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic !' Places under Criteria A, B, or C. -14- r_ � New Airport Alternative Previous survey� have evaluated the effect on above-ground properties of developing the New Airport Altemative. Since these surveys were completed, additional information on roadway improvements and the Year 2005 DNL 65 noise contours has expanded the APE. A reconnaissance survey will assess parts of the APE not previously studied. The research design for the recormaissance survey will be submitted to SHPO for app:oval. Findings from field work and azchival research and recommendations for intensive-level survey will be reviewed with SHPO before intensive-level survey work is initiated. The survey's methodology and findings will be detailed in the final technical report, which will include the properties in the APE that aze listed, or eligible for listing, in the �National Register bf Historic Places under Criteria A, B, or C. Induced Sociceconomic Impacts Further analysis of the induced development due to capacity improvements at the current MSP ( site will have to be conducted. The amount of development and its location in Minnesota and Wisconsin counties and communities will be deternuned. This data will be used in the analysis of other impacts such as, but not limited to, ground access, community impacts and wastewater � i services. Work will continue with affected jurisdictions throughout the preparation of the Draft EIS to allocate the geographic location of induced development. Land Use (� The land use impacts of potentially moving the region's airport could be enormous. The '� Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport build alternative and the No-Build alternative will have impacts on the communities and land uses surrounding the airport. The New Airport Build Alternative will have impacts on Dakota County, Washington County, Rice County, Goodhue I'; County and Wisconsin from the eonstruction of an airport in Dakota County. This alternative will also have impacts to be assessed around the current site due to the removal of the airport. The evaluation of community and land use impacts will assess changes or pressures for land use changes and the need for services of all types. Y,ight Eniiss�ons The impacts of light emissions from the airport sites will be evaluated, particularly in describing the FAA-mandated approach and strobe lights and their distance from particular points of reference. These points of reference, for example, could include, but aie not limited to, Fort Snelling State Park and commercial areas in the city of Bloomington, in the vicinity of the MSP and no-action alternatives, and the city limits of Hastings and Vermillion, in the vicinity of the new airport alternative. -15- r � i Noise - Aircraft Noise sensitive azeas and facilities (residences, schools, parks, etc.) will be identified and analyzed to determine the noise impacts of each alternative. Future noise levels will be calculated and compared with existing levels, according to several federal and state criteria. The future sound levels will be calculated using the latest version of the Federal Aviation Administration's Integrated Noise Model (INM). Five metrics will be used: Day Night Level (DNL), the State L�o descriptor, time-above-threshold (TA), sound exposure levels (SEL), and numbers of overflights. The DNL metric was developed under the auspices of the U.S. EPA for use in describing aircraft noise impacts and other environmental noise impacts. DNL is the ]ogarittunic average sound level measured in decibels weigtited to closely approximate the sensitivity of the human ear (dBA). It is based on the yearly average for a 24hour Equivalent Sound Level (L.�. 1fie metric is also weighted to account for increased noise sensitivity between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM by applying a 10 dBA penalty to noise events occurring during that nighttime period. The output of the noise model includes a noise contour connecting points of equal noise level, which can be used to estimate the number of people and noise sensitive land used within specified DNL sound levels. 1fie EIS will present the number of residences and population within the updated contours, as well as identify noise-sensitive land uses and peak DNL values for select noise sensitive use locations under each alternative. The L�o metric is used by the State of Minnesota in setting State noise standards. While recent court decisions have concluded that it cannot be enforced at MSP, data will be presented in the EIS for information purposes. Llo is based on a sound level in dBA exceeded 10 percent of the time (6 minutes per hour). It will be calculated for the worst hourly noise condition that could occur off each runway end, showing what short-term conditions could be in those areas. This rnetric does not take into account how often that condition actually accurs. The EIS will present data on population within the. L�o65 contours under each alternative. I; The time-above-threshold (TA) is a measur.e of the time during a 24-hour period that a point on �he ground experiences aircraft-generated noise above specified levels. The level of 85 dBA represents the point at which single-event (not DNL) levels are considered potentially disruptive. r Unlike the DNL metric, which uses logarithmic averages in its internal calculations, the TA I rnetric uses arithmetic means to calculate total noise. This latter technique can better demonstrate small changes in noise patterns, and can show changes in noise on a scale commensurate with i'I changes in the number of aircraft overflights. The EIS will present data on minutes of time above 85 dBA for select noise sensitive use locations under each alternative. I, Sound Exposure Level (SEL) is a metric designed to compare single noise events of differing �; duration and intensity by compressing or expanding the duration of a single event to a period of one second. Since in reality, the noise energy produced from an aircraft overflight lasts many seconds, SEL values cannot be compared to DNL or standard decibel readings. FAA and EPA typically require use of both DNL and single event metrics (like SEL) to address noise impacts in an EIS. The EIS will present data on peak SEL values for select noise sensitive use locations under each alternative. -16- �,�, �� , �I The analysis of aircraft overflights provides a straight forwazd comparison of runway use by �� alternative, showing locations of each major arrival and departure flight track and numbers of ; I flights on these tracks occurring in an average month. The EIS will present data on the number of aircraft overflights along major flight tracks for each alternative. Noise abatement measures and land use compatibility measures will be considered for each of the alternatives to mitigate potential impacts. Possible mitigation measures, addressing both noise abatement and land use measures will be addressed in the EIS. Noise abatement measures include operating procedures, modified arrival and departure flight tracks, preferential runway use system, a noise monitoring system, and a public inforniation program. Land use measures include, amendments to local land use plans and modified zoning, sound insulation programs, and purchase guarantee and land acquisition programs. Noise - Motor Vehicle Sound levels on roadways with substantial increases in tra�c due to the build alternatives will be ( i address�d. Impacts on noise-sensitive receptors will be determined where there is a noticeable �' change (3 dBA) compared with the No Action Alternative in the year 2020. � � _'' �� j';. Parks and Recreation The impact of aircraft noise on activities at parks and recreation areas within the DNL 65 noise contours will be explored. Section 4(fl Properties/land that meet the requirements of Section 4(fj will be identified, and the officials/agencies having jurisdiction over the Section 4(fj lands will be consulted. Alternatives that would avoid the Section 4( fl lands will be documented and analyzed. Detailed measures that would minimize harm to the lands will be provided. Site Preservation (of New Airport Alternative) The analysis will use data from the following sources—the Dakota County assessors office, the Dakota County surveyor, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the U.S. Census Bureau and the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. Data from these sources will be used to determine the impacts of preserving a site in Dakota County for a new airport for both a 10-year and 20-year period begiruZuig in 1998. -17- S�� The analysis of social impacts as described in part V will use data from the U. S. Census, 1990, as amended by additional surveys that have been completed by the affected jurisdictions since the 1990 census. A qualitative assessment of community disruptions will include a compilation of institutions and organizations located on proposed airport property and in the vicinity of the airport site and a discussion of how activities sponsored by those institutions and organizations might be impacted by the relocation of residents and employees as a result of airport development. Social impacts due to relocation of residents and businesses, including numbers of residents and employees, as well as changes in surface transportation patterns resulting from airport development will also be addressed, in terms of access to local and regional opportunities and services (i.e., commercial airline service, community business and institutional centers) and emergency vehicle response time. Relocation impacts will be analyzed according to the provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. Transportation Access The updated regional travel demand forecast model will be applied to all three alternatives for the year 2020, taking into consideration induced development. Items to be addressed include the following: In-depth analysis of roadway requirements to provide access to MSP and New Airport � , sites; Impacts of induced development assumptions (in Minnesota and Wisconsin); � Analysis of environmental impacts and costs of additional roadways, new alignments, and additional laneage; ( Express transit routes between the two central business districts and the new airport site and the impacts of such routes; � Travel demand management; � Necessary river crossing improvements, costs and impacts; � Interconnectiviry of regions within state and areas within the region; , Impacts of new roadway system on adjoining communities; and , 4nalysis of impacts on principal arterials providing access to site. The analysis will involve the participation of the Minnesota and Wisconsin DOTs and the Metropolitan Council. : Major Utilities A corridor will be identified for the relocation of each of these power lines. The corridors will be studied to identify the environmental cansequences of the power line relocations. Visual The sectian on visual impacts will address the following issues: (1) the impact on existing vistas resulting from ihe construction of landside and airside facilities on any of the airport sites, particularly in relationship to the existing topography, and (2) the impacts resulting from airport development on vistas as seen froin the air. Wastewater MSP and No Action Alternatives There would be a significant increase in the volume of wastewater generated at the airport under the MSP and No Action Alternatives. This is due to increased general utilization of the airport and because water used in the MAC and Northwest Airlines cooling systems will be discharged to the sanitary sewer in the future. Volumes of wastewater generated at MSP through 2020 will be projected based on cunent discharge information, enplanernent projections for future years, and projections regarding cooling water requirements and discharge. Relative to these volumes, the capacity associated with the MCWS conveyance and treatment systems will be evaluated with work to be coordinated with MCWS. New Airport Alternative I The average and maximum daily discharge rates (cubic feet per second — cfs) will be estimated l_.' for the proposed airport wastewater treatment facility. The wastewater discharge will be characterized by estimating the average and maximum daily concentrations of 5-day biochemical ( oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, total kjeldahl nitrogen, total suspended solids, total I_ phosphorus and fecal coliform bacteria. (�: The approach to addressing the impacts of wastewater discharge is included in the New Airport altemative discussion of stormwater discharge under Surface Water Qualiry of this section. Water Supply MSP and No Action Alternatives There would be a significant increase in the demand for water supplied by the City of Mumeapolis associated with the MSP and No Action Alternatives relative to e�cisting conditions. This is primarily due to increased general utilization of the airport and because ihe water used in the 6L•� i _�� I ..! MAC and Northwest Airlines cooling systems will be drawn from the Minneapolis system in the future. In the EIS, future demand for Minneapolis water will be estimated using projected ( � enplanement information along with proposed new building dimensions and associated cooling and fire control requirements. 1fie impact of the future demand on water supply capabilities will i � be addressed through work to be caordinated with the City of Minneapolis. New Airport Alternative Available existing data on wells in the vicinity of the site will be reviewed and evaluated to estimate the number and type of wells on-site, existing withdrawal capacity of such wells and aquifer used. Existing wells will be evaluated to see if any could be used to meet the water supply needs projected for the new airpoit. If existing wells cannot meet such needs, the location and capacity of potential new wells to serve airport needs will be discussed. In the event new wells are needed to serve the airport water supply needs, the zone of influence of such wells will be estimated relative to the proximity of other water supply wells in the immediate vicinity. Surface Water Quality MSP and No Action Alternatives : • �-n • �. �-� �-a.��l MSP is cunendy operating under an interim NPDES pernut which will expire on September 30, 1995. It is not lrnown what future NPDES limits will be for CBODS discharge from MSP. It is known that the MPCA intends to base the ultimate standard for CBODS discharge from MSP to the Minnesota River on a waste load allocation (WLA) study to be performed by the MPCA in the coming years during low flow conditions. This study will essentially replace a WLA study for the lower reaches of the Minnesota River which was conducted in 1985 (updated 1987). I To evaluate the potential impacts of airport operations on dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in (; receiving waters, it is necessary to assume a given control apnroach/system which would not allow surface water quality standards to be exceeded. The only defining document regarding I; allowable CBODS discharge to the lower Minnesota River is the 1985/87 WLA. This study ' allocated 100 lbs CBODS per day to MSP. As has been generally acknowledged by the MPCA, it is inappropriate to use the 1985/87 WLA to determine CBODS limits for MSP because that study did not account for baseline MSP discharges during the winter and spring months. For this I_; reason, the new WLA study wiU be performed as discussed above. As is addressed in Uecition Renort for Stormwater Control Measures (Metropolitan Airports Commission, December 1994), the 1001b per day BODS discharge limit is essentially unattainable for MSP. For analytical purposes, it will be assumed that stormwater discharge from MSP will be conveyed to the Mississippi River, which has substantially higher assimilative capacity than the Minnesota River. � r, I I _~ I- ; The scenario of piping all MSP discharge to the Mississippi River represents an extremely � conservative approach; one which allows the MSP and No Action alternatives and the New Airport alternative to be evaluated within a consistent framework. It will be emphasized that the control approach which would actually be implemented at MSP will be deternuned by the outcome of the new WLA. It is possible that this approach could be very different from the approach to be used for analytical purposes in the EIS. To analyze the potential impacts of MSP operations on the Mississippi River, the glycol loading associated with a severe deicing event will be estimated. This will be based upon the following: • projected extreme glycol application level (single event); • projected percentage residual escape (glycol) to the storm sewer system; � projected CBODS attenuation associated with Detponds; • projected river flow rate, oxygen content, and resulting assimilative capacity at the location of discharge from the envisioned pipeline. ( A source of CBODS ]oading much less important than glycol, but significant nonetheless, will be chemical products used for ground surface snow/ice control purposes. At this time, urea is the primary chemical used for this function. It is believed that urea will be replaced in the future by some combination of potassium acetate, sodium formate, and sodium acetate. The CBOD$ levels -� associated with these products are lrnown. Loading factors generated from data collected at MSP will be utilized to estimate the percentage of ground surface snow/ice control product (and �,i associated CBODS) which would enter the MSP storm sewer system. Discussion with MPCA staff has indicated that the MPCA can provide engineering estimates regarding the assimilative capacity of the Mississippi River at the envisioned point of discharge under seasonal low flow conditions. These estimates will be compared with the CBODS load associated with a severe aircraftJground surface deicing event as attenuated through the Detponds and conveyed through the envisioned pipeline. Development issues associated with eonveyance of MSP stormwater to the Mississippi River (as assumed for analytical purposes) will be evaluated in the EIS. -21- � . 'l�i I�-• � �� Detpond is a computer model used to size detention basins such that given TSS control performance standards can be met. Detpond design requirements associated with the acreages of impervious surface for the MSP and No Action Alternatives will be evaluated. The development requirements and anticipated control performance associated with constructing the required Detponds for each of the four draina.ge areas will also be evaluated. New Airport Alternative •u�., - � �. '- �. , -. Assumptions used for performing the stormwater analysis at the existing MSP airport and the proposed airport will be standardized to the extent possible. This will include the use of monitoring data from the existing MSP airport to refine event mean concentrations. New peak discharge rates will be estimated for the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year rainfall events. Event mean concentrations and loads for the 2-year and 10-year events will be estimated for the following: 5-day biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, oil and grease, total nitrogen, total phosphorus and total suspended solids. The concept for the new airport stormwater management system will be refined as follows: �; • Airport Boundary - the airport boundary will be evaluated based on the new boundary �- encompassing 14,100 acres. The Stormwater Management Model will be used to estimate peak discharge rates for the 2-year, 10-year and 100-year rainfall events. • Sizing of the Stormwater Treatrnent System - The present concept design will be reevaluated considering the change in airport boundary. Adequacy of the conveyance and treatment system will be evaluated. o New estimates of the amount of potential run-on will be performed. A concept design wiil be prepared for rerouting the run-on and the location of the diversion identified. o Glycol/Deicing Agents - assumptions used to derive COD loads in stormwater runoff � � will be reviewed and revised to more accurately reflect anticipated use. These will be (_; based to the extent possible on existing mass balance data from MSP. • I.oads - revised load estimates will be generated for the 2-year and 10-year storm events, considering the revised airport boundary. • The specific amount of stormwater (geak discharge and load) bypassed to Vermillion River and discharged to the Mississippi River will be identified. 5�►� . � - - . . '• -1 . _�rr�� _� ►/ �• ♦ � �. . An "outfall corridor" could follow two principal alignments. One would run west of the city of Hastings, north from the proposed New Airport wastewater treatment facility and then east through Hastings to the receiving water. Tfiis corridor could result in a potentially unacceptable level of (local) impacts associated with construction and traffic disnaption in Hastings. An alternative conidor would run south of Hastings, east from the wastewater treatment facility location on the proposed New Airport site to a discharge point on the Vermillion or Mississippi Rivers. This potential corridor avoids the potential disruptive impacts associated with a corridor through Hastings. To the extent that the corridor aligrunent can be routed within or along existing (or planned) roadway or utility rights-of-way, potential impacts on environmentally sensitive areas can be minimized. This easterly corridor south of the City of Hastings is the "outfall corridor" which will be evaluated in the DEIS. The purpose of the evaluation will focus on the identification of a potentially feasible alignment based largely on existing rights-of-way and the identification of lrnown environmentally sensitive areas traversed by corridor segments where there is no existing right-of-way. .. • : u .•. � • :- �� .. -�. .�. •��.. � �. . �, The assessment of potential water qualiry impact to the Mississippi River will focus on oxygen (; demand assimilative capacity. The general approach will be dependent upon receiving ' information from the MPCA about the minimum amount and location of assimilative capacity remaining within the Mississippi River for seasonal '7Q10 flows. Wastewater and stormwater load (; estimates for oxygen demanding substances for the 10-year design storm in addition to the -• wastewater discharge, will be compared to the estimates of available assimilative capacity. (�, A screening approach based on the remauung assimilative capacity within the Mississippi River will be used to identify potential impacts for the wastewater and stormwater outfalls. The amount of remaining assimilative capacity will be provided by the MPCA for seasonal (spring, summer, fall and winter) 7Q10 flows. Remaining assimilative capacity will be defined as the ability of a � stream reach to meet the dissolved oxygen water quality standard now or in the foreseeable future and expressed in terms of dissolved oxygen mass. Remaining assimilative capacity will be I� quantified in terms of the location within the Mississippi River and the dissolved oxygen .� concentration increment in excess of the standard. I; The EIS will discuss the potential for airport runoff to vary significantly in temperature relative to � existing conditions; however, the analysis will not include detailed modeling of thermal impacts to receiving waters. -23- Groundwater/Hydrogeology MSP and No Action Alternatives I� The hydrogeology of the MSP site has been extensively investigated and is well understood. � Findings of previous hydrogeologic investigation and analysis will be surrunarized, as will (� historical water quality information for the site. I` The location of fueling facilities/installations and activities relative to underlying hydrogeologic features will be discussed. Available literature and data pertaining to biodegradability of glycols in soils will be summarized. The EIS will qualitatively address likely pathways of potential ' contanninant migration, as well as mitigative/remedia] measures c�hich could be deployed at the , , site as required. New Airport Alternative Published geological reports and well log information pertinent to the site will be reviewed and evaluated for further definition of site and local geology. Available well logs will be used to describe depth of unconsolidated sediments and bedrock surface topography. T'he location of bedrock valleys will be refined if possible. Site and local hydrogeologic characteristics will be described where possible based on published ; reports, maps and well log information. The hydrogeologic units will be defined in terms of ' thickness, extent and occurrence of groundwater. Groundwater depth, hydraulic parameters and flow directions will be described. Existing baseline groundwater quality data for the site area will be described. Baseline groundwater quality information will be obtained from available information and studies such as the MPCA's ambient monitoring program, Minnesota Health Department monitoring, and University of Minnesota work on pesticide occurrence in groundwater. Groundwater susceptibility to contamination will be qualitatively discussed considering post- development conditions. The analysis will be based on previously published data. Development activities will include grading of site soils and establishment of surface water retention ponds. The mobility of substances such as fuel or deicing fluids which may be released at the facility will be discussed. Likely paths of migration will be discussed, as well as travel times to receptors such as municipal wells. The presence of multiaquifer wells and sinkholes and their effect on potential water quality impacts will be discussed qualitatively. The requirements of che Dakota County Groundwater Protection Plan will be eva.luated to ctetermine compatibility relative to aciivities at the proposed site. Potential coinpliance issues will be identified and discussed. -24- f Wetlands As more detailed design and wedand boundary infom�ation becomes available, wedand impact figures for all alternarives will be refined in the EIS (particulazly the MSP Alternative). Given the very small magnitude of wetland involvement associated with the New Airport Alternadve, the EIS will not include a substantially more detailed analysis of anticipated impacts. For the MSP and NaAction alternatives, off-site wetland replacement options will be explored and anticipated replacement ratios will be more precisely deternuned. For the New Airport Alternative, potential wetland replacement locations within the New Airport site will be explored. Wildlife Refuges No land within wildlife refuges will be acquired. The impacts of aircraft overflights on human use areas and wildlife will be assessed. Adverse impacts will be based on DNL 65+ noise levels for human use areas, and overflights of less than 2,(?00 feet above the ground for wildlife. Wild and Scenic Rivers The EIS will determine the impacts on segments of wild and scenic rivers that are impacted by overflights of approaches and departures of commercial and general aviation aircraft. In addition, segments of wild and scenic rivers that are within the 65 DNL noise contours wi11 be discussed in the EIS. B. Issues and Impacts Not ltequiring Detailed Analysis The impacts of the following issues and impact categories have been determined to be either not significant or relevant and therefore will not be analyzed. The basis for the determination is presented in the Second Phase Scoping Report. If potentially significant impacts are identified during preparation of the EIS, they will be analyzed in detail and mitigation measures will be determined. Coastal Barriers Coastal Zone Management Program Mineral Resources Solid Waste -25- �, � IV. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOL'VEMENT l i A Dual Track EIS Task Force will be formed to monitor and provide input on the EIS. This group will consist of elected officials (or their representatives) and professional staff of the affected counties, cities �� and townships; regional, state and federal agencies representatives; and representatives of airport , users/tenants and local interest groups. The EIS Task Force will be a combination of three advisory committees that have funcrioned throughout the development of the MSP and New Airport alternatives — � the Dual Track Task Force, the MSP Technical Advisory Committee, and the New Airport Technical Advisory Committee. I' 'I'he State Advisory Council established by the legislature will be kept informed of the progress of the study. The general public will be kept informed through a series of public information meetings, newsletters, informational brochures, press conferences and news releases, as appropriate. They will have opportunities to comment both informally and formally. Formal input will be solicited at the AED public hearing. Informal input from the public can be provided at meetings of the advisory groups, and at public information meetings which will be scheduled at key points in the study. 1fie MAC and FAA contact persons and consultants will be available to provide information and receive input throughout the study. SCOPING PUBLIC MEETINGS Three public meetings were held on the Second Phase Scoping Report for the Dual Track EIS. On Monday, June 26, 1995, a hearing was held at the offices of the Metropolitan Airports Commission; approximatel,y 20 people attended and 14 spoke. On Tuesday, June 27, 1995, a hearing was held at Hastings Middle School, in the City of Hastings; approximately 86 people attended and 19 spoke. A meeting for agency representatives was also held on Tuesday, June 27, 1995, at the offices of the Metropolitan Airports Commission; approximately 23 people attended and 6 spoke. The 30-day comment period ended July 5, 1995, and 27 written comments have been received. The comments and responses are presented in Appendix B. -26- i� � ' ' . � �, � � . . �� The following are revisions to the Second Phase Scoping Report except for Section VI. Revisions to Section VI aze incorporated into Sections II and III of the Scoping Decision. Title page: Change FAA contact person address to 6020 28th Avenue South, Suite 102, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 Page 1-7, Permits and Approvals: for Mn/DNR, delete "Interbasin Transfer Approval". Page V-5, B.l .l, second paragraph, end of first sentence: Add "that would be affected by the MSP Alternative. " Page V-5, B.2.1, second paragraph, first sentence: Delete "MSP". Page V-15, I.1.1, end of second sentence: Add "and potentially the State of Minnesota." Page V-23, fourth paragraph: Delete last sentence and add: "The City has an eacisting orderly annexation agreement that may result in additional land being annexed from Nininger Township. The location of the Misisssippi River and other natural environmental features suggest that any further annexations would conti�ue both south and west of the current city limits." Page V-30, M.2.1: Delete last two sentences, and add "Two properties in the known APE appear eligible for the National Register: Chimney Rock, a geographical landmazk of historic ' and cultural significance, and a farmstead at 22005 Lewiston Boulevard (Figure 32). Page V-60, EE., last sentence: Delete "Transportation" and add "Interior". Page V-60, EE.l: Add "No designated wild and scenic rivers are affected". Delete subsections EE.I.I and EE.1.2. A-1 � ', i I �'i •. �.� :,'. . . ::, . .,�., � �. / ..:,� , .,. :, • ., , '.• .: 1 .• ,. , .,. Appendix B is a summary of responses to substanti��e written and oral comments on the Second Phase Scoping Report. Comments were received at the scoping public meetings and by mail during the comment period. All written comments and transcripts of the pulb�g� aneetirngs are avaiYa�ble for review at the Metropolitan Airports Commission offices. • 1 1 1 ' ' • Summary� of Oral Comments at Public Scoping Meetings l. What is the impact of the 4-22 extension, in the naaction alternative, on the 1992 forecast of passengers and operations? -, 2. The issue of future airport capacity and �; future airport development should not go �._.; beyond 2020. 3. Aesthetics of the project, including, for example, building design and landscaping, should be addressed. 4. What is the scope of the financing plan? What is the role of the state of Minnesota in financing each alternative? What is the relationship of airport development costs and the state's bonding capacity? 5. How are property values and resulting tax revenues of the City of Minneapolis affected by aircraft noise associated with the MSP alternative? 6. What are the economic impacts on ,; communities near the existing airport if j' the new airport alternative is selected? � i!, Response l. The extension of Runway 4-22 allows airlines to operate long-haul international flights (typically to Asia) with fewer weight restrictions, making these routes more profitable. The baseline international forecast is "unconstrained" and assumes that the extension would be in place. For planning purposes, the baseline international forecast was assumed for both the expanded MSP alternative and the no-action alternative. If 4-22 were not extended, long-haul international tra�c would likely grow more slowly, slightly reducing total MSP passenger levels and aircraft operations. An exact level is difficult to estimate, since actual service levels would be deterrnined by the airlines. 2. The impacts in the EIS will be based on year 2020 forecasts, in accordance with the Dual Track legislation. 3. The preliminary design of airport buildings, including terminal and parking facilities, would not be initiated until after a legislative decision regarding the alternatives. However, guidelines that will influence the design of buildings, such as FAA requirements regarding heights of buildings and building lights that would not jeopardize aircraft operations, will be discussed in the Draft EIS. In addition, in�ofar as inforrnation is available, landscaping will be discussed. 4. The financing plan will focus on financing of the airport development costs by MAC and its ability to service the debt. 5. T'his issue will be discussed in the EIS. 6. T'hese impacts will be addressed in the EIS. : Summary of Oral Comments at Public Scoping Meetings 7. What are the economic impacts of the �',, new airport alternative on northern � ; Goodhue County? 8. What would be the noise contours if all aircraft cannot comply with StagP 3 requirements by 2005, the year selected to analyze noise impacts? 9. What are the noise impacts in northern Goodhue County? 10. The extent and impacts of ground level noise from aircraft queuing for departure or during runups on the north-south runway at MSP should be analyzed. Will there be an analysis of mitigative measures, including construction in the Trunk Highway 77 corridor. 11. What additional costs would individuals incur because of the distance of the new I airport alternative to the metro area? 12. What will be the impact of de-icing runoff on the Vermillion River? Response 7. These impacts will be addressed in the EIS. 8. T'he Congress mandated the phase-out of Stage 2 aircraft by December 31, 1999, with a provision for exemptions through 2003. Airlines are planning to meet the Stage 2 ban by a combination of retiring these older aircraft, acquiring quieter Stage 3 aircraft and by re- engining or hush-kitting Stage 2 aircraft to meet Stage 3 requirements. The operation of Stage 2 aircraft in 2005 (two years after the deadline for exemptions) would not be legal without a special exemption. Recent airline requests for exemptions for intermediate Stage 3 levels have been denied by the FAA. If for some unforeseen reason the FAA extends the deadline, and unmodified Stage 2 aircraft are still in the fleet, it is likely only a small percentage would remain. The result would be a slightly larger noise contour than shown assuming no Stage 2 aircraft. Northwest Airlines has publicaliy committed to meeting the 1999 deadline. 9. Preliminary noise contours for the new airport indicate that the DNL 60 contour does not extend into Goodhue County (See New Airport Final Alternative Environmental Document, Figures 2]- 23). The EIS will present noise impacts for points in Goodhue County. 10. Noise modeling cunently accounts for aircraft noise generated at start of takeoff roll. General noise levels associated with aircraft yueuing for departure will be presented in the EIS. Cargo facilities and earthen berms will help reduce noise impacts along the TH77 conidor. Other mitigation measurPs will be included in the EIS. 11. The time to travel to both the current site and the Dakota County site will be quantified for both average trip length and for trips from the seven metropolitan county seats. Operating costs for traveling by auto to the sites will also be quantified. 12. See MnDNR Response C. : �� ; Summary of Oral Comments at Public Scoping Meetings 13. MAC should implement feasible noise mitigation to improve livability around MSP. �; l4. The loss of Rich Acres Golf Course, in -� the MSP alternative, would have economic impacts for the city of Richfield. The golf course also provides 1_..." a buffer for ground level noise. 15. Site preservation should not be considered I, as an altemative to MSP expansion or a replacement airport. 16. What is the economic impact of land banking? 17. The EIS must address light emissions as they impact the rural life style and quality ;' of life. i' Response 13. MAC is currently implementing an updated Part 150 (noise program) for MSP which includes current and possible future noise abatement and mitigation measures. The program includes an extensive mitigation program for the communities around MSP, including soundproofing. Other operating measures include: • Voluntary limit of nighttime flights; • Restrictions on engine run-ups to designated areas and specific headings; • Use of noise abatement take-off procedures; • Runway Use System (RUS) which directs aircraft to less noise-sensitive runways when possible; and • Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOI�4S) which provides MAC officials with accurate runway use counts, aircraft type and actual flight tracks. The ANOMS is correlated with FAA radar information. The MAC will continue to investigate additional noise abatement and land use measures to minimize aircraft noise impacts associated with the MSP alternative. 14. The economic impacts of the removal of the golf course will be quantified, to the extent that data is available regarding revenues generated by recreational activities at Rich Acres Golf Course and the lease arrangement between the city of Richfreld and the Metropolitan Airports Commission. The issue of the golf course as a noise buffer also will be addressed. I5. Site preservation is not considered an alternative in the EIS. It will be addressed in the EIS as a possible strategy for implementing the New Airport Alternative. : 16. The analysis of site preservation wiil discuss the economic impacts of land banking from the perspectives of the new airport operating agency, the existing property owners, the affected jurisdictions, and the businesses located on the proposed airport property of 14,100 acres. 17. See Dakota County Response C. .►^.'. . �� i �`�, J7 j WitTEp S'fATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON AG�NCY � ��!`j REGION 5 77 WEST JACKSON 80UlEVARO CHICAGO.IL 6060�a3590 � O S �BSv 7 hv i0 iME �nENnd1 O� HE-Ii}7 Glan orcutt tadaral 7lviation 1ldmini�tration I1lrports Disuict otlica MSp-ADO 600 6020 28th 1lvanue 5outh, Aoom 101 M1nn�npolie, Minnesota 55450-2706 D�ar Nr. orcutt: iIo hava rmvi.ved tha Sacond Phasm Scoping Report !or the Dual Track J►irport Planning Prxtss Environm•ntal Impact statement (EZS) !or a nmv or impzovad major airport to sarva thm Mlnnsnpolis-St. Paul nmtropolltan area. The purpoea of the propoaed action is to aaai the aviation naad� for the deeiqn year 2020, and tha EIS rill siaultaneoualy asasss improving tha axistinq airport (tSSP) and conatructinq a na� aajor airport taaility in Dakota County, Hinnaaota. Na eoncurr�d vith tha Dual Traek Planninq Prxoaa in a previoun eoammnt lattar datad September 7, 1990. Tha atormentipned paocss• vas axplainad in a datailod llovchart in tha Yiret Phaco Seoping Report, vhieh vs pzovidad eomments on Jun� 16, 1992. lleeordingly, this proc�sa invalvas planninq and snvironmental atudina to proeead !or both improvinq the nsistinq airport and aiting a nav airpozt, and according to tho llowchart, tha ultimato s�laction batv�en thes• tvo alternatives vill be aade by ths Hinnaaota Stat• I.�gialaturm atter tha isauanco ot tha Dralt LIS, but befora the Seeuanca ot th� ?innl EIS. Thia salaction vill then bo incorporated into the Pinnl EZS aad Record o! Dmcision. Ho eontinua to support the past and ourrent actiona tLat have occurred in the Dual Track Planninq Proce�e. Although ve vnre prsliminary concerned tAat altarnativ� selection tor the nev airport saareh araaa and Sinal salactad site/layout vas mnde at a Statr leval outslda o! the Fcdaral NEPA procese, va have been racaiving tha Stata doeumantation for thesa assassments and daciaions. Thus lar, ths Statr procoss has don� a very adequata job o! avoidinq and minimizing environmantal impaets foz both trseka ot th• Dual Track Planning Prx�ss• This is particularly trua ot tbs proposmd nrv airport sits, vhich vould rassslt in no wtland inpacta. Bacausa tha State proesss elosaly parallaled tha NEPA procsas, and part o! :he intent o1 NEP11 ia to avoid duplieation and reduca paparvork (515o0.4(n)), v� support tha ranqs ot altarnativas aa propoaad tor asseramant in tho Oratt p,ZS. i1• vill continw to aupport tha alternativo salaction pzoc�as inaolar as d�qzadation to human wall b�ing and snvironmantal quality oontinuss to ba avoidad and minimiz�d. Th• Saeond Phasa Scoping Report includes a summary ot alternntiva sureh ar�aa and nav airport layouta thnt hava baan pYavious disaissed in tha planning proc�ss. TA� analysia reqarding thes• alternatives and rational• tor dismisainq thea in pertinant intormaticn Sor tha Dralt EIS. 2haralore, a summazy of thia intortnation should aleo ba provided in thm Dratt E2S. A�qardinq tha acopa o! analysia that w recommand !or tha Dratt EIS, plaaa• rater to our commenta on tha Tirat Pbasa Seopinq Raport. In our commants, vr r�?uaatad a thorouch avaluation ot nois� impact� and impacta to netural and tarminq rasourca�. Nith zmgard to aoisa impacts, thm Dralt EIS ahould provide the l�vel ufd typa ot noiss analyais in accordanca xith tha FICON rmport. Sis�eo our com•nta, va laaznad that tbm propoa�d slta !or tha nwv airport has one ot th� State�e haalthisat populations o! tha loqqarhoad ahrik•, a StaG Rhroatanad and Hd�zal CaUqory 3 op�ei�s. 2'harafor�, w r�quest in addition that tha Dratt EIS svaluat• tha presencs ot and impacta to tha loggarhaad nhrike and oth�r rara flora and tauna apaciaa and plant communitiee. Th� Mlnaeaota Departmant of Natural Roaourcea has condueted studies oi tha prnsenea ot tha loggarhead shrikm at the proposed nev airport sita, and thia iniormation 'should W includod in th� Draft ESS. ttitigation should ba considnzed that vould niniaize iapacts to tha ahrika and oihnr rare spacies and plant co�unitias . Thank you toz tha opportunity to raviav tha 5acond Phasa Scoping Raport !or tha Dual Track Airport Plnnning Procaea EZS. Ii yon have any queetions, plaase contact lSaka HacMullen ot my statt at (�13) 886-7��2. � Sincarely yours, ��Ff/t'"��Y�i�--- hirley lSitchall, ChieL Planninq and AsaQsament Branch � 'i %�. A. This information will be inciuded i� the Draft EIS. � g. 8. See response to Cky of Hastings, Comment E. The EIS wiil, at a minimum, �provide the noise enalyses racommended in the FICON repon. C. As stated on page VI-6 of the Second Phase Scoping Report, the EIS wiii analyze in detaii the potentiai for impacts to loggerhead shnkes associated with the new Airport Alternative. Coordination with the Minnesota Oepartment of Natural Resources has C. been continuously maintained to ensure that any new d8t8 O(1 Sh(�K8 Df88tlif1� impect enelysis. U measures are aiso bein€ EIS. As stated in the . the only other threat concern species' found tha piant communities e These piant communi within the New Airport protection, at the reque; of Natural Resources. T be discussed further in in more detail in the or have been incorporeted e boundaries for their own f the Minnesota Department mitigation measure wili also i EIS. i I i WIM ihY� MY fG7 �tD0..7tRT1 �M ��} cw.+�+�.� � e.r.tiw., m,uuaoNat�� Ap+.iw+ s...:. sf. ►M�R�. rN ssie� Mer 7�, 3995 IX PEPLY IItTLA TO� t1na1 Altornativ� Ln•ispnn�nRal �oe�7lient (AEO). p�v Aizpoit Cawpreh�n�iv ll�n, Dual Traek Airport Plannlnq proeee� higrl D. �inner Deputy Lzucuclw Direceor Pl�nning �nd En�ixonsrnC Matropolitan Airpores eo�wlsaion f010 7lth a�o. Soutq MSnnmapolie, !OI 55450 Yotuzal EHouzc�� Con�srntioo 7�r►Se� (HRCS) Gat Lo�i�rrC thn eppzoprlato s�ctian� (wtl�nd� aad tAn�e�n�0 and �qd■nq�rW �pKie�) !or the above rntionW propo��d proj�ce.� Th� proj�et aponror� az� not VSOA proqzm 1»no[it r�cipi�ots, thn�, th� wcl�nd eans�n�tloa provltSap� o! the 1D8S 7ood Secur!!� Act, a� �na�d nr� eot spplSesbla. 2! •ponld be not�d, hov�v.z, thet aesioa■ D� a no�-06DA pETtieipaOt thiZd pait] (pS'ojeCt epOneoz) vhich i�aet v+tlands wn�d or opeteted b� DSD� partieipaau, se� j�opasdlze th� a+m�r/op�r��or■ USDA eligi�ility. 2! •uch Sspett� at• anticipated, tha a/f1fL/OPaS�COi •Eould eout�tt th� connty Confolldatad lnrs S�rvlea Aq�ner (CTSr) oLZics to apply Lor � tEizd parc� exmnptirnf. MelaAer nnCs tea�nlcal nar Elnenci�l u■l�eane• i� beiaq pro�idad io �vpporn of thts pmjeet, t�u�, apeeifia NECS enriroai»nsal policiee ez� not applicabl�. � 7A� Sollovinq agonciae nay lu.• fW�ral or at�e� vetlanda, culturai zeawzcoo, vater qualic7 or ihzeet�ned and �ndangarrd spueiae juiiedictioa in tL� propo�ed projoet, and �hould l» coneulted. Arny Corp• o! sngineara UD [Sah and MS1d11fe S�r.ice ao�rd ot Nat�r ana 9oi1 A��ourc•s Minn��ota DapaStAent o1�N�tutel Tetouse�� MSna��oes follution Control nq.ney lt�t• 1li.toric P=�ul�ation OtSioas/dtte� AzeDuvloql�t IL etuwg� t3rN iapaec� you ar� puzeduiaq nw or �equirleq additlon�l land� snd S! aa� tederel noni.s �r� ia.olhd, it L a reqoizm.nt thst s[axaland falic7 nzoeeetion Acs �TPPA) siv asa•a�p.nt W�ppropriat�ly tll�d. Th��e sles •eoaasa�nta ate, condueeed b� flPC6 per�ona�l to rw1�v tbo proj�est tor pontbla e1lee�ts on uniqua, priar or •tate.ida lspoeeant l�raland. Conteee your local BRCs oEiica Lor sore inforeation. �c'/1�v.,,...�,,4�,L.� M LL27�M NlM7 Jcat� Conurvationi�t Tw ii�lll�r Ow�wr� d N�� MQ'Y /ti�M wwMwn n� A� w M Mw I wa ob. ti+b�1 �R �. tiW� M�. w�7. r+� r.w rr ,nn� . r.w �.a. o+w r �arrM �r. .w� . r r�r�r� ror...w nwo rr 1w�.• ..w.n. Y'ei� 6r mwwlb�a d A i'� tiY11sY� Neh. � MR Wms �a) �hsN oeo M tf� 01lsMCan�nbew� �1(SOS1TRii1 IRAM s f!Ql77PilG� (�0�1. T� i � aP1K w M Msm�1' al MPeiYa Yi Omrwr� �1 M�� Y�^. OA.1va4 a a1 WflTJOTl9 hexM s Ob3fldt W(I'001. U6G w w.w�1 wry"'o� aopr�rM' ww/. SCSabt (t67'6� ydTM�",�i y'�C¢�3i� x �.��;�, �:_.. Minnesota Department of Agriculture Iuly 5. 1995 Nigel D. Finney. Depury E�cecutive Director Plnnning �nd Environmenc Metropolican Air{�oru Conw�ission 6040 28th Avenue South MinncaQol'u. ;�! 55450-2799 RE: Dua! TracJc Aicport PlanninB Procas: Saood Phase Scoping Report � �. ��y: 1'he Miaoesota Departiome of Agriculmte has ceviewal the Second Phase Scoping Repon [a cbe Dual TracJc Airport Planning Process EnYiroameo�ll�P�t Staiemen� Based on aur review of the ecport. tbe Deparunent of Agricult�e offees ehe fotlowing commonts on [be New Aic�Ort Altsra�tivc: Tbe Scoping Report nku a Sagmenud �oach co addtsssing rbe pomntiai impaces on agrinilaue. This approac6 diatinishes rhe import�nce of agciculcure on the local. staze and catioaal ievel. The IIS sFwuld �s agriniltute w its totaLry including a complete aaalysis on the pacndal impaccs affating ehe physical. socia! and «onomic �speccs. 7his is oexssarY in oNer w beaer comprebend tbe taal unpact on agriculnue. including che di�ect, upsue�m, downsvcam and iaduced impaca resulting from a new airport. The analysis should u�ciude, bue na bc timimd ro. �he fo0ow'uwg impxcs or issues arm�nd the proposed siee, near the site. and the cortidor benw«n Dafcaa Counry and Rochesar. including areas oCwestem Wiscoatin. i. Meuvrement of the extsting agricultunl eeonomy. Panicularly agriailpual infraurucwre such as processing txilitia. u�d agricultwa! in�tanems sacti at hnd buildings. an�l equ�pmen� Value of pcoduction in rrw gocxis and value ylded produceion. IL Impacts of u�rr nirport. Using direct fumland lou fgurcs. atimate che agnculauai economic imQxt production doltar lass, and employment loss on a local. regional. aral statewide buu far ehe foliowing: ro�n..ea.x..r . s�r.i.��+uim•�w • mi�m.aoo • teo�n�rxvr.msn-eooexTauv• A. 0 A. This will be inciuded 6ased on readily available data. i, �� Mt. Nigel Fnney JWy S. 1995 Page ? A. The diRtt aonomic impxt on agricWwre relat�d incluwia including the imrtxdime occiviaa on f�rms. wpply inciustria and (ood processing iad�uuies. B. The ec000mic spillova i:npnct on ihe tollowing: I) Indusvia that wpply input goods to agricuiturc, i.e. fccd producers. 2) Udutaia w6ich buy goods fmm agricul�urc. i.c. e�h.inol producers. 3) Iadusvia affected by �he changa in consumption nnd the clunge in Rgiaaa! houu6old incomo as a rault of the nbove impac�s. C. Fsanutt tho indt�td fumlatM loss. Map the tikely areas of new itul�sviaL commercial. �fld RS1fICIWd) gfOwtli. P�IIICLLI.Vij' IiRpOft.1llt 8IC IIfC �7t15 wsside the seven counry metropoli�an arca �hat are wbject ib fewu land use rebvlatory conwls a� las accusrom ro dealing with growch issues dun in Darou Counry. ALso rtuQ � ucas susceptibie w the conversion of eommetrial w bobby htrns. For ezatnple, Gaodhue Counry is very uuceptibk w chis type of convasion. '['6e gencly tnlling landuape and the pcoximiry to a oew airpat waild malce tlu councy's fara�aod prirt�e for developmmc D. Fmm t6e atimn�e of iniuzd fartnland Ioss, esdmace cbe agriculwal a.aiomic impac� III. Esamine issue of rfabilit� of remaining tarmland. This should scudy �be fotlowing: A. E.��m+��+on of incicasing public scrvica and fiscal cosrs raulting 5nm induad noo-fum development — roads, eaKrgenry srnica, etc., and the impact of resWring ioaeased property taxu and assessmen[, plut nuisaoce wmpla�nts from nau-Cumers on femau�ing farmen. B. Atumpc to decamine th� economic uaosirion point in wms of non-farm developmenc ia aa agriculwal area becw«n rcma�ng agriculnua! or moving toward a 000-Earm xanomy. C. M examinauon, of caze swdia such at odur airpocc developmem arcas. 71x following coocem5 identifiod in tbe Scoping Repon should be addrascd within a complete agticultutal swdy u discuss�d abova noc in a fragmenttd mnnner. The Scoping Report suggau that qch coaccm will bt �ddRssed by thc EIS on an individual batis. 1. Page V-I 1. E Consuuctioa Impxu. Impaccs oa seasonal farm tiafi'ic and accessibiliry ro fazmland during and afur �6e conswaion of a ncw airport and toad system. 2. Pago Y-IS.l6.Iand VI-5. Ec000miu. 3. Pago V-1�, K and VI-7. Fuailand 4. Page V.21. N and YI-8. Iaduad Socio�conomic Impac�s. S. Page V•22 and 23, O and VI-8. Land Uu. MDA offers planning zssistance ro � So�n� � PRP�nB Plaas ro pr�serve �rci procecc their agriculmr�l tuo�uca. 6. Page VI-8. Noise. Impen of aifrrrh noise on animal agriculturc. 7. Page V-35 and 36, T md V1-10. Socinl. 8. Pag� V-41, W and VI-I I. Tr�nxposation Access. T6e Depazmnn[ of Agriculaue would lilce to saess the importance of thoroughly analyzing the issuos ra�sed in this letter. If you have any qucstions abou[ tbe enclosed commants p}wsc con�acc Robert Paaon az(6121296-SL6. Yours wly. ;Z�i�LG�e[SF ��'t °"'`'i'c-(il...... William Oemichrn Depury Commissioaer ar. Paul D. Bums, MDA Roben F'u[on. :viDA Htcky Balk. �A Jem Umuh. MAC 1on Larscn. EQB B. See Response A. C. See Response A. D. Acres of farmiand loss due to induced development wili be estimated. Mapping will be done to the extent that the affected plenning jurisdictions can determine these areas. E. This will be addressed. F. This will be addressed. G. This will be addressed. H. A Iimited number of case studies will be examined. 1. Where appropriate, the listed concerns will considered. � � ( Minnesota Pollution Control Agency I_ ., � Jwx 30. 1995 Mc. Nigel Finnry. Depucy Execurive Dircctor pfanning and Environmenc Mevopolitan Airports Commission 6040?Sth Avenue Souch ' blinneaQotis. Minncsota 55450 Re; Eavironmrntal iropu� S�cmrnt Secona Phase Scoping Repon Dear Mr. Finney: 7lunic you Cor the opportunity to reviow ar�d commrne on the Environmental Lnpact.Statemrnt (EIS) ucond phau scoping repon for the Ivtinnrspolis-S� Paul (MSP) region airport Dual Track proccss, titinneso�a Poituuon Convol Agency (MPCA) seaKhat teviewed the rcport rela[ive to the armc for which �he MPCA has jurisdictioa We woutd like to requac tha� th� following itertu be addtd to the scoping rcpon: Surface Water T6e MPCA would like to clarify the disctiusion in tho EIS scoping docvmau rcgarding HiGGhemiG2l �g�n Dem:+nd on pages VI 12 and 13. The MPCA imrnds to use a coid wea�her river waza load allocarion (WLA) study eonductod unda low flow conditions tn assess impacss from the MSP discharge ro rhe Mianesoca River. This m�dy h wip be uud to uc app�opriaee etilumt limi�adons, iwcluding limiu Eor 5-dny Cartromceom Hiochemicai Oxygrn Demand (CBOD�) for ehe MSP discLarge. 23e rivet study will azarnd [he ! 985i87 WLA scudy ior the iuwer ?viitmaou eilva wnicn iuu been previousiy wnducuc. Tx 1985/87 waz not inhecendy Aawed it mercly ropteunecd summer dry weather Ioading co �he Minnesota River. A. Ground Water i. The EIS should include an investigazion of the likely impacu to giound water whic6 could be esused by fuei scorage�handling procedures for Qu MSP altemariva New tuel storage azeaz u B. well as new fue! lina would be installed with this seenario. Whenever therc arc fitel storageThandling xriritia thcre is a poirnrial for mlmse of fuets �o ihe rnvironmrne Potrndai impacu from fuel ralcssess should be evaluated in the EIS w daermine mirigadon measures which couid be used �o rcduce che likely impacu of thae relraus on �he enviconmrn�. s�o i.+mr� �+ K: si vw. �.w ssiss-.+e.: ieiz� sss�axao twc.�: te�z� zaz•sa�2 frrrt p,q,,,., OIFrm: wWu+ • era.we • o.no� I.a�es • r,tw,aY • aon»:+« Ea+r O000AM+O' E�Kb�M • PnrC on I�CYMO oroa ��9 M �MM f0% Ww� tra� Ww/ �.1'�� W�+��. A. We acknowiedge,that the 1985/87 WLA itself was not inherently fiawed. Tha issue is that using the results of the 1985/87 WLA wouid ciearly be inappropriate to establish a discharge limit for BOD, for MSR The MPCA's decision to use an upcoming cold weather WLA as discussed in this comment is weicomed and appropriate. B. As was discussed in the Scoping Report, it is believed that the potential for impact, on ground water resources under the MSP Alternative resulting from fuei stora�e and handling will be, it anything� decreased relatrve to existing conditions. The EIS wiil provide discussion of the hydrogeology and historicai ground water quality associated with the MSP site. It w�ii aiso address fuei storage/handiing facilities and locations under the MSP and No Action Alternatives which potentially couid impact ground water. The EIS wili qualitatively address likely pathways ot potential contaminant migration, as well as mitigatwelremediai measures which could be depioyed ai the site as required. .� 1$lYNFSO'G HIS70RIG�11. SOCIE7'Y Juaa ]9, 1995 Xr. Clme Oreutt hMral A�S�tion Adminiser�tion 6030 =�td A��nu� South, Suit� 10] Mines�poli�, Mlmewta 55150 � Osa! Mt. OrNLY Am� l�eond Phase Scopinq Rnport !or Dual ?raek Alspost P1►nninq Proca�e D�koea County 3�o tluab�zt 95-3074 Shank you for th� opportunity to rriw and cose�nt on Uf� abo�� docum�nt. It pa� bNn rrirwd pursuant eo nE� raponsibilleia• qlv�n t6s 3tate Bl�torie 1r�wr�aelon Ottie�r try eh� N�tional HS�toric Pr��svation Aet ot 1966 ufd ch• 1soeWuz�� ot tb� Rd�iwry Council on Bl�torle Pr��rv�eion (]6CTR800), and eo tM nrpon�ibiliti�� qi•�n t!u Ninnnota Bi�torical soei�ey by eh� riinn��ota ns,corsc nsz.. acc ana aa• NiM��ot� li�id ASClla�oloqy ACL. W he.� tM toiiwinq oosw�s�t 1. Aa w ha►� �utsd ia our eom�nts on w»r�l oarlier airport plannlnq doeurnea, w wuld stronqly r�eaa�nd eutaittinq sh� an��) o! pot�ntlal �tt�ee dslitu�tion co �h� Ad�i�ary Counail tar tb�ir oonaurr�ae� at an �arly �rtaqa La th� cri�v pzx��. ?hl• s�ndatlon p�rsalno to tA� 71YE tor areha�oloql,cal ruoure�� and cM APt !or Alecory/uehis�ttur� rsourn�. !or all alt�maeiv•. I. 11f1 QS1N��SOp oL tW 7lPt tuqq��C� tlut adjussm�nc� vill nNd to b� aad� on�� th� lxatloa� o! QiqAvay and uansit Sapro��nes ar� }movn. M� vould �l�o �uqq��t phat th� r��ult��ot �tudi�� en Znduc�d Soelweonualc Iepace� and Land a�� b� analys�d and ixorporaeed inso �h� AP= as appropriatm. �. 3�etion M.1.1 eoneain• a li�tinq o! prop�rti�� 11aLM on or •11qiLL for th� National Api�t�r oL Bi�corie Plaou. x� not� chac v� ha.� not y�e eoneurrW ln nh� �liqibility tor all ot eh�� . prop�rtL�. � 4. Zt 1� iaportaat that all la�entosied pzopsrtie� Sa LL� proj�es as�u ar� eralvatW fos Natioetl ltpi�tar 41qtb11Lty •arly in she plaantnq proeu• oo eh�t any planninq d�ei�lon� cut W mad� vith el�ar inioraation aboue w6ich�aultural rasourer� aro aiqni:iunt. W look tocverd Go wrkinq vith you throuqhwa ttu plannlnq proee�• tor thi• pmj�tt. If you da�a any qu��tions r�qasdlnq ous rniw oL thia proj�ct, plaua eoataat our ANiw and Compliaao� S�ttion at 612-t96-5464. fl'S'�ae�r�ly, V [�.x^�.— / • `i ��"'' Dmmi� A. Gima�iad Co�ornoent Ploqrama and Camplianam OtlSeez DAO:dnb 3t3 KELIOGG BOl'LEVAND WL3Ti $AI'�T fh��. JII�tIES�T.a.;3103-I�iTE1E►HO'�E: ni:-:w-nl_n A. B. , V. D. A. The FAA has submitted the Dual Ttack's working definition of the APE to the Advisory Councii far app�oval, and is awaiting a response. B. Whenappropriate,inducedsocioeconomicimpacts and land use impacts wiil be incorporated into the APE. C. The survey report was delayed due to APE modifications; it wiil be avaii�ble in the near future. D. Evaluation of the National Hegister eligibiiity of properties affected by airport development continues to be compieted as soon as possibie when additionai impacts are determined. i i � Stm of WlscasaJn \ DEPAHTMENT OP NATURAL RESOURCES r..n orw. �...e..w �tWl �w �r �ww �w O(. / IMiMOI �Om IA.Y rl rdlw.M 90i1M1 �„ L �r RN101I Tl�pi�M �� M17t►Wis ]�au 12, 1995 IH &EPLY BLFIIt T0: 1600 Mr. N16e1 Fismey Macsopolitan eirporra Co�ia�lon 6040 2eth Avsnw Soueh MSxm�apolia, !4{ 55450 SUDJECT: Swond Phaae Scoping P.�p�rc for th� Dual Srtck Alxporc Plumin6 Procua Emlro�ntal Iap�et Stac�unc (EIS) War !!r. Fisssuy: I...., 'iha D�p�rcaanc appr�ciats• ch. oppozruniry tc eo�anc oa tb� abona doc�nt. ..�� 1. Pub11e and A6ency Iavolvewnt V� x�eoand H�tropolitan Aisporu Comission (NAC) eoneirau vieh th� Dual Srack Suk Forc• and 2�ehnicxl Cormitu�(a) durin6 EIS dsv�lopane. i--�-��, Th��• 6toups •f£�etiv�ly pzovid+d advi�• and input durin6 �ar11�r �� plamiin6 phaa�s and allov�d thu to iu�p abr�uc of plumin6 pcoc�s• pro6z�as. .! 2. Iuw� asul Conc�rna I.._,, •. Induc�d Soaio�conouic Inpaau , pa6� V-21. N.2.1. M�tzopolltan � Council auff hav� initiaud eoordination and Sapact uausnant in afbet�d Viscosvin eomsadeiu. W appr�el�t� thia •ffort. '� �� b. Noii�. P�6� W 30, Q.2.2 Sndieat�s noi» eontoura for DNL 60•75+ ar� lawrn buc noc th� i.�aCtt, IYIpaG4 ibould h� Mc�rnin�d in th� EIS. I� c. Ssansportacion Ace�ss. V� �6zu rlch tha propoud seope of � aaalyaia (p�g� Vi•11) co addr�u cransporcacion eyetao �apanaion indue�d d�v�lopo�nc lapaccs. A paztSeular eonc�rn ie aey nw oz acpand�d up�eiry azoaain6s of eh� Se. Czofac (au couu�nt 2.�. b�lw) or Misainlppi 81v�n. V� �xp�ae aery rueh pzopouls vould ! alao e�quir� s�pauc� �mrizo�nul aaal7ais by e6� Wpartwnu of I Sranrpozution Sn Minnuou and Yiaeontin. Noneth�laaa, eosu and fimdin6 sourc. for any sueh Saprowwnu adould b� Sd�neifl�d Sn .. th. Dual 2rack EIS. d. Ma�ot Otilieiu. Thla xnal7�i� should no� �uae b� liaie�d co aa7 t+�euux7� r�loucion of �:iacin6 �l�etriexl tzans�iuion lin�s. It ahould alao SneluM ury wv ucllit� Ssprmr�s�nea n��d�d te s�svle• eh� �:iscina airport or ch� n�v iiu 1! d�v�lop�d. Thia would Saelud� •l��cziul erasusi�slon, oil aad nacural 6as plpalin�s, telephon�, •ce. aad davelopsent of asry zesp�etive eonidors. , A. These impacts will be inciuded in the EIS. Costs ot transportation access improvements on Minnesota and Wisconsin regionai systems wiii included in the EIS. C. . Feasibie corridors wili be identified and sociallenvironmental impacts determined for major electricai transmission line relocations, electricai serv�ce to the new airpon, sanitar sewer discharge, storm sewer discharge and jet tue�pipelines. Natural �as lines are immediately adjacent to the new airport site on the east and west sides. The gas utility has indicated that they have adequate capacity to serve the new airport. Telephone lines should be able to foliow the rights ot way developed for �oadways, and therefore separate corndors for teiephone lines w'iil not be established. Mr, Nlgsl Fiim.r • Jia+� 12, 1995 •. Vild anA Se�alc Rlv�rs. Ac pa6u 11 �aA VS-lY it Sa iMicaced fipuu in chii oau6ory haw br�n d�uralwd to noc t» !' '�. si6oifieanc aad c6�r�for� v111 noe.!» anal7aad unlus id�ncifi�d duriaa pnp•r•cion oc ch. E25. Pa6� n•bi indf,c.c., tsp:eu �iil p. D. E� pacts on wiid and scenic rivers will be included in the M d�nzaiwd, and usua�� ctuc if a 2,000 fooc w�rfli�e g �� ehr�shold vill b� ninuin�d chis discaek� wp�racion viil noc S�e�rac� �macc�publ� disturbanc� ispicq tn Vild and Sesnlc Rlv�sa. Giwn chia appar�nt imonaise�n�y Se should M elariii�d I��-, . !f Vild and Sunle fllwra vill F» evaluatad on not. Va zeeo��nd � th�y ahould. At pa6u v36 and �7 eh� aru af pot�n�ial n�v aizport lapaec for S�ctlon 4(f) landa ia d�serib�d u eh� �irport prop�rry and laad� vithia th� DHI. 65 contour. It also ewe�s elue lapact aignitieanc• is s�W 6y o!lSeials haMna juri�dlceion ov�z ch� prop�rry. Tha Lovar St. Cro1s Nacional Sc�nie Aivacvaq is a 4(!) properry auu6�d by th� Lor�r St. Croiz Maa�6w�nt Comission (1SCMC is a pamurship sad� up ot NacSonal Park S�xrolc• and Mparm�nca of Natural fia�ourc�� Sn boeh suur). LSQ1C s6auld ba conaulud co d�usnln�d ch. pocencial diz�et and iadir�ee iapaat ury of ths alrport 1aQrownanc alc�rnaeiws vould tuve on th� T.o�rar Se. Czo� Naeional Se�nie &Svsnray, Nsasaing only th� ovarflighe Sapaet ss7 prseluc4 eoaaidaraeion of aueh Sap�ets u: euv/expand�d eraaapozueion faeilltiu ezouin6 eh� Riv�rvay; induead d�v�lopHne alon6 cb� Riwrvay or vithin eh� vanrsh�d; Snerw�d vuuvac�r/scorn+rat�r diaehar6��; iner�u�d Biv�rvay us� deaanda Lneludin6 consid�ncion of boae owzezovding aooe�rna; •ce. f. 9nlisc�d Isau�. Th� Haeional Park 5�rvic• sdould b� eanaulced z�6ardia6 poc�ntial Lvpaaca any airporc laprovawnc alt�rnaciva oay haw on th� Miaaisaippi.fliwr Nacionil 0.1v�r and &�czeacion Area vhieh ast�nda fron Daycon co jwt soueh of kiutin6s. !!SP Dirpo�itlon und�r N�v Alxpoce Alustutiw. 'Ihe dispodtion of �:lsein6 MSP L! a n�v aizpore is d�v�lop�d should b� dieeuss�d Sn ch• LIS. Shis ahould includ� futus� ua• of th� prop�rry, ait� abandocm.nc, and an7r uso�ia[�d �mrirom�neal al�an-up aad r�lae�d eo�u. ?dank you for Uu opportuniey to eo�nc. If )ou hava qw�tiona, pleaa• ull e� .c t�ls> e79-s7a7. sincoroly, �^; ��,.. ' 2S�oaas A. Lo 0 Lmizot�wnul Ispaec Coordinaeor c: S. Mo� • LV( J. Naniaon, Lovr Sc. Crois Macu6a�nc Cooission, 619 S�cond Screac, Nudaon, VI 54016•1376 M. b��ira+n, VDOT, Di�cziat 6, 718 V. Clairanone Av�nus, Eau Clalxe, 4R 54�01 E. The purpose of the Section 4(f) portion of the Draft EIS is to analyze the impacts_to publiciy-owned lands et parks, recreatio� areas, w�idiite/waterfowl refuges, or at historic sites ot national, state or locai significance if those pu6liciy-owned lands are to be used for the devalopment of a transportation project.. Whiie the Lower St. Goix National Scenic Riverway �s a.Sectio� E. 4(t) property, none of k would be acquued .for development of the new airport akernative. in addition, it is not anticipated it will be within the DNL 65 or DNL 60 noise contours for any ot the six runways of the new airport aiternative. ' Other potentiai impacis will be analyzed as they arise. For example, the Oraft EIS will identify corridors for highways, stormwater/wastewater, power lines end pipeiines and, to the extent that these corridors are in the Riverway, impacts on the parkland wili be analyzed in subsequent env�ronmentai documents. In addition, baseline traffic data in the Hastings and Prescott areas F. will be analyzed and compared to projected 2020 traffic data without an airport, so as to determine if transportation corridors are needed to provide access to the new airport. If it is determined that additional co�ridors wili be needed, their impacts wiii be assessed Ci. in subsequent environmentai documents. The Draft EIS wili analyze induced socioeconomic impacts as the locations ot induced development are refined. F. The Mississippi River Nationai River and Recreation Area is within the DNL 65 noise contours for the MSP aiternative. The 6oundary of the recreation area adjacent to the MSP alternatwe is identical with that of Fort Sneiling State Park. Impacts on the land within the state park and the recreation area wiil be analyzed in the Drah EIS. As noted in Section R.1.1 (page V-311, the Drah EIS wiil anaiyze the impacts of the MSP afternative on provisions of the managemeiit plan,for the recreation area. The Mississippi River National River and Recreation Area is not within the DNL 65 noise contours for the new airport alternative. The reuse of the current MSP sfte has been addressed in a document entitied Minneapolis St. Paui international Airport Reuse Study" which the Metropolitan Council adopted on December 17, 1992. This document recognized that the sale of the current she will not creats revenue to heip with the financing of a replacement airport. Also, that public and private f��nds wili be required for demolition and site clean•up betore the site can be redeveloped. That document was developed as part of the dual-track planning process. � �� Wsconsin Department of Transportation OfNNe� M Te�rWs�wn Aoe�une� ttMK�U OF A6IWUUTiC7 � °�� NO2 5lresypen Mwww ►.0. ba )f t • 7une 30, 1995 • wr..�,, v�n s»o�.ms TYWwr: l6W13KSStt fA%: �W) 3!7•�7M Mt. Glen Occvtt m: �ea�:saaas� FM-ADO 6020 28ch Avenue South, Room 102 Minneapolix, MN 55450 Th��l Trar4 A�rmrt Planning Prrcr_te Fnv�mnm�nnl Tmmarr� arnm�nr C.^nnri phacr Qrnnino R'rxirt �C77 MS. QfLUtt: We tnve mriewai th� Sxond Phase Scoping Rcpon and find it complete in scope and wfficirnt in depth to mch teuonable environmrnnl conctusions concGrning the altemarives to mat the long range ait transportation nads oC ehe Minneapolis-St Paut region. We wiU be pazticularly iaterts�d in the induc�d land-use nnd trutspoctadon impactt for Wisconsin u addsssed in the IIS. If I ean be of furthu usistana in this matter, pleau advise. Sincerely, ,D� �"��- Robert W. Kunkrl, P.E. Direccor RWK:ji3/335426 a: Repraenrarive Shcila Harsdorf Senatot Alia Clausing Martin BaJQnan, V1ruDOT ✓Nige! F'utney, MAC 'fom Lovejoy, DNR � � MINNESOTA-WISCONSIN BOUNDARY AREA COMMISSION � 619 SECOND STREEf. HUDSON. WISCONSIN Sa0i6•iS'G SncvnY O�v SPw+rx Sla�a w Ne SL C+ois r.� r.w�.. aie/ Mb�iuiOP Rtren su�e[ 1965 ...... � vM� iiw srr OIY�rs IALL.1 � Y Y�iM sn ma awn RECEIVED ' JUL• 1 S �gg5 DEPUTY EXEC. DIR. July lZ, 1995 Nigel Finn�y M�tropolitan Airpozt• Cocmiasion 6040 3Hth Avs S. HSan�apolii, 14t 55450 D�ar Mr. linn�y: On behalf of ths Minnmsotn Wisconaia Soundary Ar�e Cot�i.nsion (1tAeAC), I would liko to shenk you for eom.ing LO Haatingn vith ons of yonr publie seoping mr�cinga and Lor pzoviding th� public with an opportunity to prmsent tsstimony regarding thia moat important etep in the Dual Track Aisport Planning Procena. ?he Solloving co�ants ware endorasd by unanimaue vots oi onr St. Cro1x Roqional Co�aittee on July 13, 1995 ia Stillvater, Minneaote and ar� provided for your conaidoratioa. Thay vill be conaidarsd for endorsamant by ouz luli Co¢mmia�ion ac iCs Auquat 30, 1995 m�ating. Tb� lMHAC Commiasion�zs and atalf az• diesurbad that t4• r�c�ntly publiahed acoping docum�nt indicata� a posaibl• daci�ion to •acop� out• oi thr impact study the potantial impacts Lha Nov Dnkota County Sit• vould qsv� on th� Lowor St. Croix National :lild and Sconic Riv�rvay, peniculnrly aSt�r stating in tho doeument tha2 thara will b� an impact. 2hara Sa additional concarn by MtBAC eommieeionara about ch� pot�ntial impaeta this •track• ot th• prx�ss vould hava on tho boundary ar�sa of both scatoa alonq th• Mieaiasippi Rivor Valloy vithin clo�• proximity of the propoe�d Dnkota County aite. Heaauso t�mz• ao�ma 2c bo an und�rcurrant oi doubc about vhy MSiHAC Commiasionars (eppointW _by tda Govsrnora oi ths two stataa) are int�r�ated ia thia que�tion, Z vould lik� to pr�a�nc io you a v�ry brisi collmetion oi axcarpca lrom ths M7HAC 1994 vork plan on tAa miaaion acatsaent of cha HWHAC. •Tha (MNBAC) Cov�tasion S�rvica Hrea is defin+d Sn tho oriqinel compeet es 'tha boundnry land�, rivar vall�ys nnd vatara compriaiag ch� boundnriss o! (th� tvo atatea ot Minneeota and NisconainJ. Sn thia eontoxt, and aa a vorking policy, tho Commisaion has historically bNn involvod in iasuas that hava b��n, ec tims�, e• �neompaasing aa tha waceraheda oi thef• two riv�r�, and, at otdor timaa, as apocillc aa a ainglc parcal oi land or island in on• of cha rivora... •Tha original compact sLat�a tdas the Co�ia�ion weo formad co (1) 'conduct atudim• and make recommmndationa...(2) 'assiat in A 0 A. Impacts on wild and scenic rivers will be inciuded I in the EIS. MAC ScopSng m�aciag tratimony July 12, 1995 P�gs 2 coordinating tha studion, eons�rvetion eSlortn nnd planning und�rtak�a by th� s�v�ral d�partm�nta, eg�nci�s end munlcipaliti�a of th� aeac�s...nnd (3) 'to asslnt in cha pnzticipetion by th� stat�a...in S�d�ral proqrama•vhich r�lat• to th• proamnt aad fusurs protmcsion, uso and dovelopmont in tho public intsrut, o! aucd bouadnry laada, rivor vallmys and vnura . • B�ceus• oi t61s mt�sion acc�pt�d by th� nvo scatu and ratiii�d smvarnl timoa ovar the past 20 plus yenra, tho NxBAC Sa most iacszo�ted Sn th� potential impacta ot this proposW public sorvico pzojoct. Ths Hx9AC is h�aca, aoas itterses�d ia eha saope o! qusationa the tinel LIS prxaas vill undertak� to study. Mi:BAC comwia�ioner� ar� somwhac pnzzlai by tbe lack o! g�n�rally available intormntion oz data ss v�ll a• t6� poasibility that ch� qu�stion ot impecta thia propoa�d proj+ct mighs hav� in thm follo++ing ar�a mlght aot bo fully addr��sod ia shs ESS procsaai 1. tAa soeio-economic impact ot both build alternetiva on all atfsctad local unica of gov�rnment and privet• buainana, 2. tAo impect of induc�d davelopmons around the proposad n�v Dakote County aite, 3. th� total fcop� o! sh� pot�ntial intrastructura no�d�d to aupport thia aite, 4. th� seopa o1 tA� light pollutioa and viaual impactn producsd by th� Dakota County aita, S. th� problems vhich vill aria• by th� n��d to r�plac• utility lines nnd eorridora, 6. th� de2lnition and conaistmat applieatlonn of che APE (Arsa of Potantial t11�et). 7. vator quality isaus� including Oue aot limitad to: stoxm-vac�r rvnotf vaat�-vntet menegamen2 vacar tabl� iasuaa th• Wild and Sc�nic River iaswa. HHHAC Commisaionara hop� ebat all po�aibl� aiforts ara �xhauet�d on studying tho impact of tb�s• quostioai as �all as otdon vhich will b� raia�d in th• aeoping h�esiaq prx��a. MwHAC Comaianion�ra atecd r�ady to h�lp ia any vny w� can ia tacilitacing tdis pzoc�an nnd �ncouraga you to contaes MFtBAC Statf during thia procs�a toz anavere or assiatenc� you te�l ve miqht bs abla to provide. Shaak you !or chs opportunicy to spwak thia ov�aSng. Sinceraly, � �'~�� Jamo� !t. Fitzpetzick Coffii.aaionez Ninn�aota-visconsin Houndary Araa Commiaaion B. These impacts wiil be eddressad in the EIS. � LOWER ST. CROIX MANAGEMENT COMMISSION i�UtBl ACB�CI£3 w�nw�� rtn sFfince • u.s. ocrun+ert of rne wrraan OBARiMEM d NATUMI RLSWARS • Sf�iE Of MWNESOTA OBMTIIENT Oi NAiLML �ESOU�CES • STAT! Of w15COMSMI 1-1iES0TVWRSCOl/SW MUMWNY MEA COMlMSSqN IDt-0FF1001 berer�w Mur� Aarp�n�s► Mw�w� Mn+ July 5, 1995 Mx. Nigel Finnay Nstropolitan Jlirporta Commission 6040 28th Avanu� South Ninn�npolis, Hinnasota 55�50 �owEx sr. cRma µ�7pNAt ANERN'AY RE: S000nd Phane Scoping Arport Lor th• Dual Track H.irport Planninq Proc•aa Environmantal Impact Statamant Danr Mr. Finnay: On 1»half oi tho Lovar St. Croix tlanagamant Commisaion, tha coordinating vohicl• !or tha nnnaqinq aganciaa o! t4o I,ovez St. Crnix National Scanic Rivmrvay, th� tollowinq co�onts are oubmitt�d on tha abova-named report: • Pag�s 11 and V2-1� - Th� Co�iasion disagr��a vitb th� - indicated elimination ot "vild and acenic rivara" as an amlronmantal category that do�s not r�quir� d�tailad analysis in th� EIS "becauae thair impacts havs beon dotormined not to ba siqniticant." In lact, va do not b�liave thi� dntarmination �as intanded, given the atatament on pag� V-61 vhich saya, vith r��p�et to th� Nild and Scnnic Riv�ra impncts vith a Nw Airport ]V.tarnativ�, that •tho impacts yill ba d�tarmined in tho LIS." (S�a turthar commant balov.) Pag� V-60 (EE) - Wo ara unavars ot a"National Znv�ntory eompilsd by the t�daral D�partm.nt o! Transportation.• 2a ihis a corract ralArencal paga V-61 (EE.2.2) - The commission aqreaa that tho impacts should be datarminad in th� E2S, and raeo�nnds tha lolloaing considerations 1n that raqard: (a) It is acknovladgad that tha FNJ� has axacvted a Namorandum o! aqraament vith th• National Park S�rvics that allovs ovorlliqhts abov� Z,0o0 t�at ovar units o1 the National Park Systam, on th• prosumption that noise impacts abova that lov�l "v111 not qan�rata unacc�ptabl• diaturbane� impaets to vild and sc�nic riv'ra," o! vhich th� Lovar St. Croix Rivervay 1a one •eqm�nt. Th• Commi�aioa balisvea thai tlfa EIS adould dotnil how mueh Rivorvay noi�• inpact thar� vill actually b� lroa airczait uslnq thr nay ai2port "-' axec�tina takealf and 1 ndina annzoach ap,--••�•--a n�ar and over~che Aiverrrav, vhich do not asan to bo quita tha sama as "oveztliqbts." (b) 1Tta Commission a:aumas that som� aizcralt vill normally b� rnquirad to bo l�sa than 2,000 tart ovar tho Rivervay, aither for accsan to or departura lrom a nnv airport, or bacawe o! claaranco r.strlction� ior op�ration in and asro ��onditions �d airspaco oi a nav airport. Th� axpectad traquan and lmpacts r�latinq to sueh xcurrancas, and maasurea to ainimiz• hazm to ths Riv�svay, sdould ba dotailad in the EIS. Tt�e Commisaion would lika to ba notiSiad o! ths scopinq docision by lSAC vith r0apact to thia isaue, and v111 look lorvard to participation in any evaluetiona. Thank you tor tha opportunity to comment. n trulg yours, � Qa Tsrry A. lSoa, Chairman cc: Tony 1lndersen, Hational Park sarvica - st. Croix It�nt Lokkasmoa, Kinnasotn DNR Judy Rinkead, !R�-NI Bcundary Area Commiasian Brian 7Wams. Hational Pazk Sarvica - St. Croix Hernia MCGaver, Wieconsin DNR Holly Shodeen, liinnesota DNR Steva Johnson, riinnesota DNR Tom Lovejoy, Wisconsin DNR Rebncca tiooden, Hinnesota DNR , Jim Fitzpatrick, M7-MI Boundary A.rea Commission Dan MCGuiness, !4i-tiI Bcundazy l�ea Commis�ion T1m Harrison, LSCIic Coordinator CCOiDPlA7'R']Pl OfFi� ►YnmosW4caim bmd+r7 Me Gma�Wa� tlf $KVN'Sawt HdYn� Wlmei�S101btflf /6vreoTWphee+lflAtY7117 lAXQU)�M-9777 WlamrYnTd1pM+(/'1.71]%AM� A. A. Impacts on wild and scenic rivers will be addressed in the EIS. , B. B. FAA guidelines for the p�eparation ot an environmehtai impact statement state that the Department of Interior (not Transportation, as stated in the Scoping Report) maintai�s a list of river segments which appear to quelify for inciusion in the National inventory as a wild and scenic river. C. C. "Overfiights' include all forecast takeotf and landing maneuvers at the �ew airport end are included in Dual Track noise modeling efforts. The EIS wili present noise leveis attributable to the new airport for several points on the St. Croix waterway. �i. D. As currentiy anticipated, no eircraft using the new airport would, under typical operating conditions, overfiy the St. Croix at aititudes below 2,000 feet. The aoise model captures all forecast iandings and takeoffs at the new a�rport. Numerous generai aviation aircraft using othe� regionai airports currentiy oveHly the Lower St. Croix. The impact on overfiights due to general aviation activity from other airports wiii be addressed in the EIS. / DAKOTA COUNTY OAKOTA C�UNTV ADMiNI$TMTION CENTEP .:1:�'..�L . a-�r�. ]une 27, 1995 Mr. Gkn Om�a, Disaict Airport Ptanner Faltnl Aviuion Adminiscruion 6020 -28th Avenue Sou� Mianppolu, MN 53450 Mr. Nge! Finney, Depury F�ceadve Dirawr Mevopolitan Aitporu Commissio� 6040 -28th Aveaue South Minrcapolis, MN 35450 Gendancn: omec of rHe couHTr eo�wo m�z� ae...�e C?�lwn Counry wwid lilm w thanlc bah the Fedeni Aviation Adminiscration(FM) and the Mevopolim Airporo Commisaioo(MAC� for this opporwniry rv provide commcncs on the Second Phase Scoping Repoct In cevitwinQ the Saond Phue ScopinB Rtport, Dakon County 6nds ihe documcnc to be yenetally well organiud and complem. However, D�kon Caunry remains conarned wi�h artain issues conttined in sevetal saoons ot tbe Report. Spxifially, Dakoa Counry believa thae [he Remou Runway Concept shai�d be removed u an almmative (or continuod acaly:is in the F�vironnxata! lmpaa Sawnent(ElS). At the June 18, 1995, mating of the Mevc�politan Airporo Commission. it wu inrned ttuc the rail componenc of ttu Remoce Runway Con�xpt wouid ewt at last SB00 miilion nnd make the MAC the opentor of one of the lugat ur6an nil symms in the Uniced Satq. Further, i[ was tlu MAC's eonsultanPs view that the Rrmote Runway Concept (u described in the Scoping Repon) would not wrvive. but inund wouid evotve intu � tuvo airpon sysmm. T6e Minnesoa Legislamre has diraud in suaim that the purpose of the Dual Tnck tirpon Pluming Proau wu to ei�her expand MSP or eonswn a repl�amwc vrporc, bue in �ny rue w luve oniy one major airport in the Twia Citia Meuopolinn Ard. Therofon. Dakon Caunry belicva ttut tho MAC should fiad dut while Uu Remote Runayy Conapt may be �ehnially lasibk. ehat ic is na, 6owcver. a ptudeac altetaative, snd shaid Ix diminetnd frnm cawideruion and uulysis in dK IIS. A. IA. The Commission will evaluate this alternative when the study is completed. Iialron Ca�nry �lso believa thu �II poaadal addidooai Fnviraun�ani Impact Smdia that may rKcd m be undernicea and eomplemd m 6alince ui alternuive being cansiderod v part B of the Dual Tnck Airport Planning Process should be idcnafed and listed. It u the opinion o[ Ddcoca Counry tlut na undi both �he Leeislanim and �he public tuve tn undersrmding of ttu compieu seope and magnimde of tbe altemativa beinS Proposed an w informed nnd �PProPriate dceision be made. . Daru�a Counry does na agra with cmclu�iau raehed in �de Scopin8 Report. S�crioa V. - P.2. Lighe Emissions • Naw Airport Alromadve. Dalroa County belicva chu light Emissiau �hould aos bc limct in the ScoQin¢ Report, Section VI • C. (u an) issue and Impact Na ' Requiring Deniled Analysis. IJaknn County believes tlut loeating a tnajot inrcrtutional aicport in a cunl sesdng as well u the rclated induad devdopment that toliown ailt produa �.r. significant light emission environmenn! impxts wlun compared w whac ezisn today. FuNur, I?�kai Counry mainnim thaz che repon errora in Seccion Y. - P.2. when it does na I!, consider Hsstings u a mffuiendy prozimam "populuion ancer" du[ would be impaeud by New tirpore Almrnuive light emiuiwu. F'u�ally. Dakaa Counry rcqueses thu du MAC rc•initiatc Iocal government cepresenntion on D. bah teehnia! and policy commivtts a� wu originally dirttad by the Minnesou Environmeani Qualiry Boacd(EQB). Dalwn Caunry belitvp it is critin! that affccted loal Qovernmenu be givrn the opporamiry w fully putiaQue in che dcvelopmen[ and preparation o(the EIS. . SintttelY� ,-�� Joseph A. Harris, Chair Dakon Counry Hoard of Commissiaxn � i j x: Dalcon Counry Board of Commissionen I', I Hcandt Richardson. Caunty Adtninissatnr ( I.ouis 7. Bmimhurst. Dicecwr. Pfiysira! DeveloQm�nt Division L_.i B. The potentiai EIS's identified thus far are presented in part H of Section 1, page 1-8, of the Scoping Report. C. The issue of light emissions will be included in the Draft EfS to the extent of detailing tha candle power of runway approach lights and strobe lights, both mandated by the FAA, and the distances from which each will be visibie. Aiso, the Draft EIS will include the shortest and longest,distance between the airport prcperty and the city limits of Hastings. Reiated induced development ,has been generaily ellocated in areas near the new eirport alternative. The locations for induced development are expected to be refined during the EIS process� there will be a discussion of light emissions from this development in the Draft EIS. D. These committees will be combined. See Section IV of tha Scoping Decision. (I_..._�, fa``4U�E A�Cqf'�2 �� 3TEPHEN P. BIOOM G�ODHUE CWM1"1'Y Counry Admintistrafor I ' , � � P.O. Box 408 ��+>q�,••� L• h�S�o- HOtl Vrmg. MN 5506&P108 i ��, (8721�85-3001 (612) 385��OW FAX 7une 29. 1995 Mr. Nig�! Finney Metropolitan Airporu Commission 6040 28th Avrnue South Minneapolis, MIJ 55450 Dear Mr. Finney: pleax xcept this leuer as an explanntion of concems regarding the airport sim search from a Goodhue Counry perspectiva Commissioners Richard Samuelson and RicLand Mallan have bcen involved in this procas, spresendng �he Counry Board. T'ho Dakow Seatch Atea has gmnaced the following conccros: 1. Goodhue Counry recendy reaf5rmed tha goal of the compreheasive land use plan and zoning � ordinan«, whic6 is m prestrve agricultural land. 'ihe counry is primarily agriculnvc based. 2, Croodhue Counry in wmplecing e long rango scrsmgic plan w addms funve programs and servica. Goodhue Counry's annual gnowch raie is approximazely I pacrnt and we are planning for slow convollcd growth. J. The tocation of an airport ia the Dakota Search Acea would gteazly accelera[c the counry's growth, which we would not be adoquacely prepared for. Agrieultural iand would need to be developed, the overal) � would be sevaely �mdersiud and tesud to t6t limitt, md tlx aeidioomt danand for xrvices would be diffiault to manago. 77mre are grnuai wncrnu over Goodhue Couary losing it's nual ideatiry if m airport is siud nearby. 1'he County Board has passed nvo separak rcsoludoas opposing the Dakota Seazzh Aaa. Although we applaud your plaeaing effocu, we vrenud you w Jmow thac we believe aa airport in the proposed site area would noc lx in che bae interesss oC Goodhue Coimry ciriuns, whom we represenc Thenk you very much for your comideration of chis matta. Sincerely. iKan %t%La�G�% i ; A. Mazsett. Chairman Sth Disvict Commissioner Richard Maitan, lst Disuia Commiszioncr Ric6ard Saznuelson 2nd District Commissioner Roben Noah. Jrd Disvics Commissioner Mariin Benn�d. 4th Disaitt Cownissiooer Gootlhus Cauiry 8aerd d Canrtw�sionan no�,no e. �+uu� niou�ro s�um'on nosenT o. �ou� �wa.N et>siw oc,w A u�esen i■ orv zn a..er x avo 0 or+o !n a..n i�07N+rSY�w iVc00q�l.Wq m11Yaw1v0�•�nw 70�i7Cw+rlBwa Qft]l�8M1 1 W WYq, W SG00/ CMn� fW W SSOd! M/�aR W ldM� WOW�. W YC77 IYO �Nni W 600ei .....>^ M EPd C�p00rRrrly E+nO�bYw �.J�Y: BOARD OF COWPY COhQ13LSSiONERS GOODHUE COUNTY, �IDHNESOTa L?arc: �L�yyq� �t _ 1995 Mouoa by Comtnissioner �ap, SecondM by Commissiooer $�Sy�yp 7Le following raolucon aas aficied by C/MalLw, saonded by GSamiuison and duly Yiopmd: WBERFF.AS,1Le Me¢c�otitan Aicnora Commt.uion hu w�hxaed a kag�6Y �n �4 ��Y �dY; affi WF�REAS, The Commitsion tus comideted fuwce airport sira both mtrh aad south o( che mevopolinn acea; aod WHEREAS,'lhi+ thorough sidng procas hns rcveakd a 6vaabk poaacal sne ia swuhem Dalmn Cazacy sdjaam m du C,00dhue Cou�y becder: and �Yf�1S� Goodhue Counry raliza beaeno w it'� busimssa aad indusvies with t�e preseat laation ot the airport: �nd V4'HERF.I.S� Goodhue Counry may uperience uadue scw on u's laud use a�! mnspomrion symm. imoa� ahu impoccaac ucis should the airport be relaamd Uoser ro GoailnK Camry: �nd �VSERE,�S, Goodhue Couary may atso h�ve dif5cuiry providing ht�an aad 5naacial rnaum ro mas the gmvth dem�� dut �a odjaceat iatemational aicport aould brin8: - NOW, TSEREFORE BE IT RFSOLVED. Thu rhe Goo�ue Counry Hoatd ot Commissioms hrrotry suppom du cootep[ of disconanuin8 ��Y ��S of sicpott siting effota: aod BE TT FVR1'BER RFSOLVED, T6u the Bmrd eacounga the itgittuure m endorse the elimiaaoon ot um��ry ssuag eapendinun by cocdueung a facma! vae on dm aupocc saicg iuue during ihe 1995 Legistadve Sntion: �ad SE I1' FCTRTFIER RFSOLVED,13u dm Bwcd sappotu dm effort m toasickr long-asm expa�ion of the PrneH airport siu in �6e wurbem me¢opoGm uea: aad BE TI' F[JRTHEIt RFS()LVED. Tlut the Counry Admiaismwr submit copies of thi� caotu6on w�he bieaopoGtan Airpom Ca�mission. Govermr. r�„�•,,��• Govermr. GooAsue County Ltgistarive Deleguian nnd spptppcius l,egistarive Commicee Membetship. Bmrad Ytt ;�Inllw Yn ;Hasurt Yss Nwh Ysa Samuelsoo Yst Som o[ MinKson Counry ofGoodhue 1. Saphen P. Blaom. duly appoi�ed. 4uili5ed aud Counry Adminismtor o( du County of Goo�ue. Snte of Minocon. do 6cceby �adlY thxc I have comp�ed dx focegoing copy of a resohuion auh the origidl miau¢s of che p:nceedings of du Board of Counry Co�:oners. Goodhue Couary, Minnewn u drir sasiou held on tbe 21st day o( Fs6N2� 1995. noM on file in my office, and luve touad du same w be a aue aod eotrect eapy thereoL Vl�mess my hand md official xat u Red Wing. Minraon, rhis 215t day ot filtnlatY 1995. �, `�.�,,� ,--, Smphea P. Hloom Cawry Admiaismmt I ' ' r�iy �9, is�s WASHINGTON COUNfiY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS oove�w�ert tofrtn /��00 �iST STIIEET NWITFI � STLLWATEII, I.�MNlSOTA 55W1-0000 �1f�+iO�000 hew�W Mstirr �tY�7F6017 Glrn Orcun Fedaal Aviuion Adminisaation Airpons Disaicc Offia MSP-ADO-600 6020 28th Aveaue South Room 102 Minneapolis, MN 55450-2706 Dear Mr. O:cua, �� , wer n..« or.n t 1YM wYrtion 011w49Cliwnrn Yfi►MMMn tlirt110 � Oow bn0�o.+ Oi�ma b I'i Tlwiic you for the opponuniry ro m�iew the txond Ph�� Scopine Revort for he D�a� IT2ek Aitport Pl �nin .. We apologiu for the latrness of thae comments but hope � that you will consida them in ttu finai daision on the scopi�B tcport. The County is co�cecned a6out the wertlighc impacu on bah wildtife populations and visitnrs co �he Gcey Cloud lslu�d Regionat Park. In addition, the Caunry rnnrinua m be conxrnai atwuc the �' i posential economie and physica! impacts on roads, bridges and gmerel land use in the i souchern pordon o[ Wuhington Counry. Itiemss�d grvwth woutd require addirional xsvixs ' sueh u sewess, polia pro[ation and xhools. We �hanlc you for including these issua ia h ' tbe xoping documrnt uid offer the following specifie commenes. Secrion V l. Page a, Bird Aimaft Haards In addiaon ro evaluating the potential hazard of b'uds to airctaft, [he impacu of overflighu on bisds and other wildUfe should 6e tv�tuattd. Grey Cloud Island is on the Mississippi A flyway for migarory waterfowl and provida nesring and snging area� for migradng birds. Saaon VL Page 8, Land Use j Rdocation oC elu airport will bring significant growth pressura on the communiries in ; southern Wuhingcon Counry. It is noc rnough [o juse evaluue the comparibiliry of �he airpott with ezisdng tand use ond the pt�nnai land uses of euh community Comp:ehrnsivo B Plan. The E15 must addras land use ehanga that would be expecmd if [he airpon wexe reJaeat�d. Exh communiry will nad co tnsseu in pinnned land use in in Compiehrnsive (( Ptut u a rault of this rttajor land uu change. � ?he ewt uulysss shouW na averlook the eosn m loai govemmwrs of pcoviding uidirional ,, scvica tlsae will be oadai zs � swtt of thi� induced developmrnt. Sxtion VI. Page 10, Puks and Recceadon I- Grcy Cloud Isiand Regiona! Puk is acp�ctal w uperience an ambirnt DNL lower than the i �old sa in the seoping docummt. We wouid like w resnte our concern abou� the ! poteadal Cor negaave impaas on puk visieon firom noiu and Cmm the sight of plana and/or ' vapor ini(s. Rocrcation rssrrrch on aupiane overflighu supporu the faet thaz noise fmm 0 aitptanes detcacu from visiror apairnas. lt also shows that evrn the sight of airplanes or vapor trails can conaibute to negadve reetration ezperiaxa. Evm Nough the pmjxted leve! of DNL 'u decmed �n acaptable level by the FM, the fact that most acdvida in ehi� tegional parSc tare place outdoon makes the projxted noise from overhead airaah � cral _: cOnccn. Sarion VI. Pa�e 11, Transporrarion Axas � We concur thu 'Necesu=y river aossing improvemrncs. cmv, and impacts' nad to be idendfied. We do cecommend that che anatysis of impacu on principal atteriats providing , attu� to the site include an aoalysis of impacts on Ne regiona! minor aneriai sysiem. We �lso request thac coundes be iavimxl to partidpaze in discussions on relata! [caffic impuu. 'Ihank you ngain for ehe oppocwnity to comment on Uu drafe documrnt. Since�ely, Wally Ab� Chair Wuhington Counry Boud of Commissioners c: Wuhington County Commissionen Tim Schug, Counry Administraror Don Wisniewsld, Public Worla Diroctor Jane Harper, Principat Plannu _ ( .�.�._._... � � i ! �. � CatJA{. [WIDYMFtlT OIM�ORTtJ1tfTY / AiAIINATiV! �GTION �� A. The EIS wili anaiyze the potentiai of the various alternativesto adversely impact waterfowl and baid eagles, inciuding migratory waterfowl on Grey Cloud Island, based on the number of overfiights. However, based on a reviow of the scientific literature, it wiii not be possibie to ascertain in yuantitative terms (e,g., disturbance distance thresholds, changes in reproductive success, etc.) the degree to which watertowi or other wiidiife species might be affected by aircraft noise. B. The EIS wili address the iavei and location of induced development that would rEsult if a new airport were located in Dakota County and the infrastructure needed to serva that development. The EIS will also address the fiscai impacts oi a new airport including the Iocai costs and any effect on the tax base of affected communities. The Metropolitan Councii in a related effort to the EIS Process wili be developing regionai positions on �ssues reiated to land use changes and infrastructure needs that would occur with the relocation of the existing airport., The Council is also expected to address vanous mitigating measures that wouid assist local government in dealing with the land use and fiscal impacts of a new airport. C. See Response to City of Hastings Comment E. Noise impacts below DNL 65 an d visuai �m��oud associated with aircraft overflights of Grey Island wili be addressed in the EIS. D. Major improvaments on minor arterials due to the New Airport alternative will be identified. i ; i � • .� lu; � . . � �I�� Il� i. . � M��l.. L'a� . • � SECOND PHASE SCOPfNG REPORT: Dual Tnek Airpon Plaonins Procas Juir S. 1995 '' The Soudicn Dakaa Camty Towrohips �nd Citia Airport Plam�ing Group consists of reprcanaciva hom nch of2he thinern towrtships u�d sx nuai dtia ►ocued in south«n ,-- Dalcou County. Tbe Grnup wu fortncd'm April, 1994 to monicor uid provide input m che i� msny studia tlut arc being co�tucted ud daisiom being rtuda rdual w �M rcgioru! I L*P� �� P�8 P�+� T� �u Provida! hae are on bdntf of thc Airport PLnning GrouP• General Fsaues It appean tlut the Scoping Report u fai�iy complae in cerms of idenrifying issua thu nad to be addrnsed in tbe Fwl EIS. We have some major concrnu reg�rd'mg tl�e dep�h u whic6 sonx of the itwa wi� be addra.xd, u well u MAC's cvrmnitt�xrrc to inwre tlnt thae u adaryate dme and opportumry for loa! umu +nd the pubGc to review the ��d P�+d� ��Bo�6 � w MAC regardiag tbe 6ndings of the EIS. �_�. We acpre�ed our wxan u the pubtic hearing in Jawary and in a raohmon passed this S{xing thu htAC is reducng, ruher thin inaruing, tLe opportunitia for ongoin6 i�ut u[he dua! tradc plamring procas. Ttd� u evidaiced by the elomtution of the nvo I7'edaun► Adwwry Cqmmttep, aud the apptrmt reducuon oC the rok of the Po6cy Tulc I Force in cbia proccss. As we s�id in lawuy, it is beginning to appear thaz coaningful amput into the proeev u going to be s�aifiad in atder to comQlae the recommudatione l0 thC LC�2lltNtt OG L1IDG. �Cf1C $itt PtdCVLt10[I StUdy ii bdlild sCf1Cd1114 �d tffC SlfitKl�I L1KI tCOtWf1I1C Wf}'Sti IIL4 OI1FY t�V StBftGd. BOtfl Of f}ICSC t$ORS WIII IC�UtfO �-,, coosdaable rcview and disausio0. which sbould be the focsu of the Potiry Ta�k Force 1, aed Tahmal Canmittw ovc the nact sevcal aarnhe. Bo�h of tlx�se scudia are imporn�tt comporKnc� of the fuu! EIS, which needs to be wmplaed in a very short paiod of time. We very much wpport a umefy dedsion, but do not fed thu ie stauld be u the ocpenx of legidmate publie review and cawnem. ,� We xrortgty wggat thaz MAC re-esnbli�b t6e comminx swczure thac lus ban used w n�ceadWly in the puc. MAC stauld �Iso provide a dmdy opportuniry for mriew of %�. A. See Sectio� IV of the Scoping Decision. , portiow of the EIS � are rnmplecai nehex than waiang umil t}x mrire draft documera u eomplaed Tiris will imure etus the impaaed loa! umu vrill conrinue to be an eedve ud manwgfid par[ ofthe proee.u. 08'-aitport impscts u�d induad'devdoprt�an finm a new airport ue very sgerificant itsua rdated to the airport sring. The dixzuson m che Scoping Report in thex areu ie v«y vague. There is � coasidenble smount oFinforaution thu nads to be guhued and rcviewed rdued to o8'-tir�wrt impacn, axh u naasporsadon nccess, wauewata veannmt for the inducal development, aad an �abtished regiona! policY ��8 expansion of the htlfSA boundary. Euh one of thae issud, ukm sepuucly, aou�d mdly require wd! over six months ro addras in a reasonable mannc. Our concem is chat none oCthae mattrrs luve bew di�assed pubGdy in ury daail ro[ha poim, al+a than to say tbey will be addrased in the Fine! E1S. lt u �lso mrntioned in the Scopin8 Rcport thu t1�e s'vport site wnssts of I4,100 urn. !n �; fact, we undersrand that the muwnum aru that would n«d to be acquired 'u u last 18.no .a« Wr� �o� or��x �a �r�ry �� «+ �o a««,o� r►u wwrn►ups and citia Airport Ptuming Group pa+sed a raolurion this SprinB neommc�ding ehu Zo.x40 acra be acquir�d by MAc. This is a sgrtifiam is�ue rdaced to �'; the Aroa of Potamal Effas thu nads to be raofvcd bdorc the E1S is wmplacd in gaxral, we do not fed dut the Ares of.Pocrntia! Effect !w bem adequudy defined ss rdaxa to socid ic�paecs rcwltirtg from rdoarion of tbe airporc co D�Icou Coucrcy, u wdl u noix Ieveix, 6rtnland impaas, wd 6ght emissions. !t is suggeRed, for uunple, that tig}u anissioro do not evrn rKed to be sddraxd in the EIS a� a sgnifiartt faaor. Noix snd Gght rmtting &nm � new sitport in a nual atea will have � rtnuh more sgni5cazrc Ara of Paattial Eff«t in rdative temn d�an an urban or sub�uban ua �fut hu adsring ttigba Icvd� of uoiae and Gght amssioru tlun a nua! ara. Soeciflc Poirtts: Page V-15: (I, 5rx paragraph) It u stutd that a finandng plan u being prepnred u�d will be detailed'm tbe E1S. Wben w+ill it be:vailable for review and commmt, ud what will it include, in daail? This is a aitial componens of the E1S, but tlxre u limited dixustioo of it in the Scoping Report. 71u "scope' of che 5nencing ptan �hould be d�ailed in the Scoping Report. Page V-16: Q.21) Fwncing imp�ees potmtially inrluda the Sute ofhfitv�ewu for Ux new airpat txrt ehu u na the case for dae ocxtirtg airport. Why? i " � 'i i : B. Ci. A financial plan is being developed by MAC, and will be available by the end of 1995. See Response. 4. of the oral comments. Potential MSP financing impacts on the State of Minnesota were not listed due to an oversight. They will 6e addressed in the EIS. i .�i II ' � 'Page V-17: (K.2.1) Only 6rmland that would be acqu'ved, aad advmdy affated 6rim �ad d�sxs. wauk be inctuded in ttx APE Farmlud in che vicurity of the airport that rem�im as 6rmtmd but is na acquired wiU �l�o be sBoificarrtty impsaed. 7'hsse p�t�rtia si�ould be i�nrified aad mrluded iu �he APE Page V•42: (0,21) It u xated thu populadon forecasts reflea cart�adon of ag�riadnue. This will not n�ssarily be[6e ax with a new urport and'a should be recogrriud thu camprd�anive pttm will nad m be etungod co reflea new grow[6 rewttiweg from the ai�port. It u atw atated thu umoncom have born wmplaed for the Ciry of Hastings. Tttis is oa the eax. A portion of Nwiagv Towmlrip ranaim co be anrr�ced unda Ttti aa atfuty ume�cation agreaamt. There is no rxntion of Washingon or Goodhue Covmim u 6r a impaa on lu�d uu. Both countia and comcawda such ss Daunark Towrnttip� Wdch Towmhip, ud Cannon Falls would be u dirxty impscted a� wme wrtrcnunitia in Wncondn thu are mrntiooai. Page V•34: (S.) W6en w01 the Site Praavarion Swdy be eompla�d? This is a cririal �t of tbe EIS, bw tl�cs is no disassion u to completion time ecbedule a oPP�'�+NtY � P�� whrn it is completed. It is alrrady sevcxl mom}u ' bddnd �cbaiWq which is a concan to tbose dtia ard townships chu ue rtau , dirxt}Y impacted. (S.1) ldecrci6a t S,?20 aca to be acquired. Raohrriom passed by Airport Plamcng Group, ttiat wae forwarded to MAC this Spring, indiuted a dedrc w 6m 20r40 aaa acquircd in orda to insure thu noix impacu ue mitigazed. Atw, the bet thu the APE doa not inetudc acquisidon of highway sccas oortidon does na appar to tx consiscera with che'uumc ofshe EIS, sina �he corridon thu wi71 be required will, we uodusund, be part of [he airport property. owned by MAC.. Page V-36: (t.2.1) Defina the APE a� the arca where resdrnts and bisnases will be renwved &om Soda! impacc� go we11 beyond the uea oCacquisrion arid rdoncioa We fed this area should irxlude rtast, i!' na all, of satthan Daka�a CaNry• Page V..11: (W.2) Tnruportuion accaa, both on-srte and re�onal impacts, is a very importaM iswe relued to rdocation of the new airport. Nonethdesa, the diuuuion of �he scoping for swdy in ihe EIS for T�narion Acceu for the nnv ai�pon is oniy one paraBraph Ttxre is no daail provided upon whieh we can +d�quatdY cormnen� ottxr than that we ue very tonconed thu Gnle tlwught has bcm �vm to dria topic, and thu it appears the issue will noc be suffiduttly addra.xd in the EIS. Srvm the finukid ud social imp6cuioro of t6ie issue. P�ge V-14: (Y.2.1) tt is uued thac the airport woWd mcompus 14,100 acra. 2hie is noc wcsstwt with the Wwn�ltip ud atia rzwlution for acquisirio4 nor is it cantistatt with fi8�rea uxd tivouglwut tffe xopin8 report thu indicue l8,720 acra would be considaed for site praawaiwa Page V-52: (BB.2.1) W01 the cortidor for t!u waxewaec ud sormwuc dixhuge pipa be idmri8ed in deuil? T6ie � a agni6artt iuue Gom a cast ud socie! an : impacu nandpoim. We do not fed it an be wfficiemty addrased in the limited �mwm of tune availeble to complae the E1S. What will be the opponurtity for {oa! input inco this dedsion? Page VI-5: (Economic) Tbe cosu oCoff•airport impacu cxsd to be cwvidved alcmg with air{wrt devdopmatt coxs. 7'hese cosu nad to be includai in rhe EIS, as wdl. Page VI-7: (Fumtux!) "G.oss of fum pratuction" �xeds so be more deuly definod. This should inctude the aegecive impacts of a ruw airport on furnland ud tivatock ren�aining aRc the airport is �wuctod; not just 6rndand [hu will be takai out tieini ofproducrion. Page Vi-!0: (Socid) How wiU a"qualiutive asses�nent of comtmwcy disnprions" i. be conducted? What doa it man7 This is an ettmnety vague and incompine dixussion (one srntence), bu waild mosc likdy be i signi6canc camponnre of che �'', E1S, in taw of impacv. We fed �bere is a nxd for morc dcuil in this arca ihat st�ould be included in the Scopin3 Report. i. Page VI-1 l: (Traosportatiott Accas) How detailed will the "aoatysis of rnvironmensal impacts" be for oew madways, ac.'! We ue vay concemcd that this is an area in I which t}Kre witl be limited oppominity for loca! input, but is ax oCthe more , imQorum ueu co be inctuded 'm tfx EIS. We fed svongly [has loca! input imo thae disauaions u aiti�al to the di�aunion of a new airpon. How wil! loca! unin cd the pubtic be iavotved in thu aoaFys.s, aa fu ae 'vipue? i s i _, � I I _ _: naw �mpacts on tarmm operovons ana a ncu�zura-ra�ncao businesses and in ustries that are in t e vicinity of the eirport site but wouid not be dispiaced by airport development wiil be addressed in tha EIS. �. E. The EIS wiii inciude documentation of households and businesses that will be lost it en airport is constructed in Dakota County. Metropolitan Council stafi has been an� will continue to work with affected areas to identify induced development of residential and non- residentiel lend uses. This materiel will be reported in the EIS. The wording of tha section regarding annexation by the City of Hastings will be revised. Impacts o� land uses in alI counties of the region, and the countias adjoining the region.in Minnesota will be E. addressed in the EIS atong wtth impacts to the counties and communities of Wisconsin. � G F. Work on the site preservation enelysis is proceeding and the report will be released as soon as h is completed. G. Section S.1 identifies 18,720 acres in the APE, and does not mention acquisition. Acquisition of properties fot the new airport alternative is expected to include 14,100 acres in Marshan and Vermillion Townships; all airside end lendside facilities and the federally- mandated Runwey Protection Zones would be Iocated on airport property. Properties in the DNL 65 noise contours and State Safety Zones A, totalling 4,620 ecres, would not be acquired. These properties are m Marsnan, Vermillion, Nininger, Douglas and Hamption 7ow�ships., While the Dual Track Airport Planning Process, initiated bythe Minnesota Legislature in 1989, does not specifically prohibit purchase of properties outside the Search Area, k doas not explicitly permit it. The Search Area does not eMend into Oouglas and Hampton Townships. The EIS will include mitigation measures for noise impacts. Mitigation for noise impacts are expected to include approaches other than property acquisit�on. H� The corridors for highway access to the new airport site will be identified in the Draft EIS. As noted on p. I- 8, once an eirport alternative is selected, other environmental documents for ground access will be prEpared by MN/DOT. The ground access will be under MN/DOT's �urisdiction. '� M. Section N of the Draft EIS, 'Induced Socioeconomic Impects,' is intended to address issues relating to the impacts of eirport davelopment, in areas beyond the airport property. The Metropolitan Council lSection N.2.1) has developed rates of induced development growt.h for aftected cities and townships in the counties ot Dakota, Goodhue, Hennepin and Washington, in Minnesota, as well as Pepin, Pierce and .�. St. Croix �n Wisconsin. These geographic areas constitute the APE for economic.impacts for the new airport akernative. As stated on p.Vl-8 of tt�e Scoping fleport, the Draft EIS will discuss community impacts related to the induced development. 1. The transportetion access items to be addressed in the EIS are listed on page VI-11 of the scoping document. K� J. The text is consistent with figures used throughout the Scoping Fieport. Site preservation does not necessanly mean acqwsition. As noted on p. V•34, in the dis- (.. cussion of site preservation, land use regulation can also be used to limit development. K. The storm and waste water outfall corridor will be identified in a level of detail sufficient to establish that the corridor is � feasible alternative. �� L. As noted on p. VI-8 of the Scoping Report, the EIS will analyze induced socioecnnomic �mpacts, or ofi•airport impacts. To the extent that data is available, the costs of induced socioeconomic impacts will also be included. N. PR. The impacts on farming operations displaced by the new airport alternative and on those remaining in the vicinity of the airport 'site once the airport is co�structed will be addressed in the Draft EIS. N. The Draft EIS will include a list, compiled from available sources, of the types of organizations and institutions located on the proposed airport property and in the vicinity of the airport site. Their actrvities, 0, also compiled from available sources, will be ascertained. The document will inc�ude a discussion, comparing communityactivitiesand 1990 Census data, oi what could occur in these organizations and institutions with the displacement of people as a result of airport development. O. The analysis will be at a"corridor-level". A feasible corridor will be selected and the impacts on the environment within the corridor will be determined (e.p., wetlands, archaeological and historical properties, ' city o� engnn _.. .._.. 11WMASEGAH ...... �oq ►ATRY.'.LI AWAOA June 26, 1995 gu� ��p s�NDa� w u�sN MEOOORE WACH(Eil GLEN ORCOIT "`�" 1O°�' TEDER7IL JIVZATZON ADHZNZST52)12ZON �N�o 11IArORTS D2STRIGT OPFICE °N"''""'O1 MSP-AD0-600 EA VANOV(R36Q so.o .s:N x:ar�.2 sovrx - soon .oz aa•• HINNEAPOLIS, 1W 55450 RE: C2TY OF f.AGIUi COT4�427T D01iL TRACX SECOND PH)1SE SCOP2NC DOCU!lSENNT Danz tsr. orcutt: At its maetinq o! June 20, thm Eaqan City Council zavlawd a r�eo��ndation eonurning th� S�eoad Phas� Scoping Documant !or th• Dual Track E25. Sa action tak�n at that mutiaq, th� Council dir�ct�d that land banking b� includ�d as an alternativa conaid�r�d Sn tA� EIS. Tha land bankinq altarnativa is impoztant bacausa it Vould p�rmit ths raqion to hava an option in thm ov�nt that the aizport is not r.locatad and oparations qrovth axcende eurrent astimates. St vould also provid� a middls gzound b�riean tha tvo polar positions. Zn otAer rrspmcu, ths Council lound tha Scopiag Doeumant io ba adaquatm. It you bava any quastiona in thia reqard, plaee• contaet na. Sincaraly, ��C�j.��..�a7��--••► Jon Aohenstmin Aaeiatant to tha City Adminiatsator cc: Niqal Finney, 1Satropolitan Aizports Co�ission �� TNE LON[ OAKiREF MhWtItlAMp MGiRI iW0 KOI o101 ROAO 1lIE TMOOI O1 S14FNGTH AMO GROWM N O{IN COYMUNIfY M91 COAC1�u�M MM KCYI 1tlwOOlA 56137.IN) iKNL MMMQOt� '319 Hlprt Ut7� a1.rW �� I�IT Mi�t100 M7eMt�lYl.+�f] [fAIdODPaA+W/Aflm+aMAeronfltobl'R fALH171NiJ.1W ioa Nin r..w� ma u�r r.au� A. A. L.end ba�king is not an EIS ahernative because it will not meet the purpose end need for the project — but h wili be evaluated as an implementation option for the New Airport alternative. RESOLUTION � 60-95 RESOLVTION PROVIDWG COMUI9ENTS ONTHE PROPOSED SECOPID PHASE SCOPIIVG REPORT FOR THE DUAL TRACK ALitPORT PLANNWG PROCESS ENVIitOtYN�NTAL IMPAGT STA7'EMENT R'RERE.AS, The dual tracr airport ptanning pmeess mandacod by the Minnesoca 5tate Legisiutu:s is daigned to deurmine the major airport development oprions in the region for the ye:v 2020 and their consequences, and; fi'HEREAS, One track addrrssa mys to provide the noeded capaciry and facilida at Minneapolis-St Paul laeemadanal Airport. A ucond aack provida che needed capazity md faeilities u a poeenaal replacement airpon in tho designaeed search area in Dakoa Coimry, and; WRERE.4S, The State and Foderal Environmrnral Impazt Statemrnu (EIS) for the Duat Truk procas being prcpared by MAC and [he Fedcnl Aviadon Administrarion (FAp), will eompaze thoso aad all other feasible altemaava to meet 2020 aviation demand in light of a 6ost of environmental criteria, and; i� fi'HE12E�I.S, The Second Phaze Scoping Report is a precursor to the Dua! Track Eavironmmal Impaa Staumeat and ia purpose is ro idrndfy which alternarives aze frasibie and daerve fvrt6er evaluadon in the EIS, and idrndfy issues, concems and impacts of the altemadves, and detecmine which ona rcquire further dcrailed analysis in ( the EIS,and; R'HERE.lS, T'he Saoad Phau Scoping Roport is madc availabie in order to obtain public and agency commmcs on the adequacy of the proposed scope of the EIS, and; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RE50LVED BY THE CITY OF 8.lSTING$ th�t the Fedecal Aviacion Admiru�radon and the Meaopolitan Airpotts Commission are hereby requasai w ineiude the following comments and suggesdons in the official rceord az commmn from the Ciry of Hutings regarding the adequacy of the proposed uope of the E1S: I. The Scoping Report suggesc on page V-16 that thc APE (Atea of Potendal Effecu) for impaco on the wc bau iaeludes all land and property uquisition, rclaBng co d�e F.cm�omic 'unpaccs for'the com m develop each airport altemadve and the financing soiuea and mechanisms which couid be used to pay for airport development." 'I'he City of Hastings would recommwd thac che APE be expanded w include all areas that wouid be effected by the location of an airport or any of iu relaud infraswcture improvemeao,regardless of whacher tha land 'u actuaily needed for propaty acquisdoa The Ciry of Has�gs believes dmt the APE will be much geater thaa that which is idrntified on page V-16, and the EI5 shouid reflect the larger area. II. The APE is again too narrow az idendfied on page V-20 when diseussing FIistoridA:ehiucnual Resourca. While conswcrion of an airpott may not direetly result in the demoliaon of any National Register properties, relaeed infrasweture improvemenu caused by the conswction of an airport, such as imQrovemena to B Highway #61, will likely result in impacts on tha Hasrings Ciry Hall, whieh wu rceendy rcnovated ae a cose of over 52,000,000, along wich other National Hiuoric Regisur propertia along Highway #bl, as well u eha hinoric downtown in the City of Hastings. These impacts must be detetmined in the EIS. IIl. The specifie itnpacts on the land use of tho City of Haztings and opportwiiGes for growth and devetopmrne musc be eleariy idendfied in che EIS, as ouclined on page V-23. Furthermore, the Second Phasc Scoping Rcport should be correceed to propaly reflect d�at the Ciry has not compkud all of its approved ordorly (',, annexarions, az eerrain conditions may result ia sddirional land being anaexed from Niniugcr Towaship, based on an ezisdng orderly annezation agreement dated February 1, I993. N. The Ciry oC Hastings ttquesu that it be included in the at%cted environment for Light Emissiom as idrndfied on page V-24, and �hat Lighc Emissions be �• eliminated from the 'Luua and Impacu Not Requiring Detailed Anatysis" section, and that ic in fuc be analyud wish all ocha issua in chc EIS. A. Section N of the Drart EIS, 'Induced Socioeconomic Impacts,' is intended to address issues relating to the economic impacts of airport development , in areas beyond the airport property. As noted in Sect�on N.2.1 of the 5coping Report, the Metropolitan Council has developed rates of induced development growth for affected cities and townships in the counties of Dakota, Goodhue, Henn6pin and Washington in Minnesota, es well as Pepin, Pierce and St. Croix in Wisconsin. These geographic areas constitute the Area of Potentiai Effect (APE) for economic impacts for the new airport alternative. With the help ot Dakota County and locai communkies, these rates of induced development prowth were further refined, with development capacities allocated in Dakota County for analysis in the Draft EIS. As stated on p.Vl-8 of the Scoping Heport, the Draft EIS will discuss community impacts reiated to the induced development. The Oraft EIS will identify and evaluate corridors for int,astructure to serve the new airport, including highway access connecting Trunk Highway 55 with the new airport. In addition, baseline traffic data for the Hastings and Prescott areas are being analyzed and compared to traftic projections for 2020 with and without airport deveiopment, to determine if additional highway improvements are needed to serve the airport site and their environmenial impacts. B. The airport's effect on the infrastructure in Hastings has not yet been determined. The Met�opolitan Councii is currently assessing anticipated road requirements for the area in the year 2005, assuming that the airport were not buiit in Dakota County; then,, estimstes wiil be prepared for the same year assuming the airport's construction. If there is a significant d�fference between these figures, it will be considered an effect, and the impact on historic resourcas will be evalueted. C. The last sentence in the fourth paragraph on page V-23 regarding land use and annexation �n Hastings shouid be reworded to read as follows: 'The City has an existing orderly annexation agreement that may resuit in additional Iand being annexed from Nininger Township. The location of the Mississippi River and other natural environmentai features suggest that any f�rther annexations wouid continue both south and west of the current city limits.' D. The Draft EIS wili address the issue of light emissions to the extent of detailing the distance that runway approach iights and strobe liyhts, both mandated bythe FAA, wiil be visibie. In addition, the Draft EIS wiii note the shortest and longest distance between the airport property and the city limits ot Hastings. V. T6e Ciry of Hutings recognizes t4ac industry stand�rds are sueh that noise impaca will only be meanu�d against the DNL 60, 65 70 and 75+ aoise conwurs. Howeva, the Ciry of Haztings reqnem d�at the EIS inciude discussion of the E. impaca on our oommuniry due w che inereased flight noise, d� may not neeusarily occur within the iaduscy reco�ized noiu eontnurs, will resuit in a signficant iaaease in noiu for Hastiugs raidrnts. Vl. The Ciry of Fiastings is saongly opposed to any consideration of ail rypa of Site Praer�aaon, wtrich is simpiy a form of lnnd banldng. TLe Ciry of Hudngn u opposed to any sady of the land banldng options. VII. To suggat in the Setond Phase Scoping Report thu the APE •is du ara wherc raidena and businasa will be removed to permit developm�at of the aew airport attemadve' (PaBe V•3�, aad shus w7l be t6e �ly ara dsac 'soci�l impaeu m be conridercd include those usoeiatcd with the disrupcion of emblished taritia, meh u raidences and businesses, as well u pattans in the community; (page V-3� is compleuly shott sighoed. The APE must be expanded to inelude the rndre City limia of the City of Hastings, thus tesulting in significant study of the social impuu on the Ciry of Hasrings, if m airport wett loeaud dircedy ouaide t6e Ciry limiu of the City of Haztings. VIII. The aft'ecud mvironment for the new airport altanadve on nuuportation access ' iuues is imclear, as discussed oa Page V.dl .The impacts ottraiuportation aeecss and all ttansportation issua must mclude the rntire ciry limiu of the Ciry of Hasrings. IX. The potrnua! impacu on the Ciry of Hastings water syscem must be identified in the EIS if a aew airpon were located in Dakon Counry. (Page V-4�. The City of Haztings aelmowledga �hat the Pnire Du Chiea Aquifer is considered the APE for thc study of impaca on the vrater systcm. However, the EIS must include specific scudy of t6e impacs on the Hastings wacer system, similiaz to that proposed for study of the potrndal impaca on the Ciry of Minneapotis water sysum, fot thc MSP airport option (page V-4�. X. 'Jhe Ciry of Haztings suggesu that the APE for Surface Water Quality evaluadon 'be expanded ro include the rnare City of Haztings and the impact airport development would have on the storm vrater managmrnt propram for che Ciry. (Page V.52). Ttus roquest is especiaily cridcal due to the suggestion in the Second Phase Scoping Report that an "oudall corridor' could follow an alignmeac souch of Hastings, east from du wasuxarer trratmenc facility locarion oa the proposed New Airport siu to a discharge point on the Vermillion or Missi3sippi Rivers. Ihe study of this corridor, az outlined on page VI-15, must include evaluadon of the impacu on the entire Ciry of Hastings, since this will 'focus on tfie idenrifiearion of a pountially feasible alignmrnt based largely on eusting rights-of-way and die idrntificadon of lmowa rnvironmrncally smsidve aras aaversed by coeridor xgmeaa where there is no existing right-of-way.' (page VI-15) ADOPTED BY TFIE fL1STINGS CITY COUNCIL TAIS 19TAD�lY OFlUNE,199S Ayes: chratae�a xiv��, rius. .tt+�. S�odc. E�d�v. ltmtaJa arll�cr ►t�ns Nays: ttre � / M--La-> .s-..........--- Miehad D. Wtrner . Mayar � '—�. t./„ .:,`. i•._��,�.i_ 'r Barbara C Thomp.ton City Cferk-Trearuro F. E. While DayMight lsvei (DNL) is the most common noisa metric in the industry for measuring noise impacts, other metrics are useful in quentifying the effects of aircraft noise. As noted in the EIS Second Phase Scoping Report (pages V-25 through V-281, torecast noisa levels will be analyzed using four suppiemental meesures: the State L„ descriptor, time-above- threshold (TA), sound exposure levels (SEL), and numbe�s of overflights. ,, Sound leveis for noise sensitive areas and facil�ties (inciuding residences, schoois, pa►ks, etc.) outside the DNL contours wiii ba evLluated tor each ahernetive. Noise values for points within the City ot Hastings will be calculated using DNI, TA and SEL. Overfiights will be portrayed graphicaliy. F. The APE for the issue of Induced Socioeconomic impacts, as stated on p. V-21 of the Scopi�g Report, inciudes the eftected chies end townships of the Minnesota counties of Dakota, Goodhue, Hennepin, and Washington and, in Wisconsin, Pepin,. Pierce and St. Croix. These parometers inciude the crty ot Hastings. Aiso, as noted on p. VI-8, community impacts from induced development w�li be included in the Draft EIS analysis. G. The impacts ot transportation accesss and transportation issuas will be addressed wherever they can be identitied to differ substantially from the No Action attarnative (i.e., require additional improvaments). Spec- �'a. ifically, the area to be analyzed inciudes the entire seven-county metropolitan reg�on, the western counties of Wiscons�n and the counties adjoining the region in Minnesota to the south.' H. N. The study of the impacts of the proposed airport expansion on the City of Minneapolis' water supply systern are warranted because that is the source of much of the airport's (existi�g and proposed) water (see Tabie 8, page V-46). The proposed new airport is expected to obtain all of its weter from on-site wells, not from the City of Hastings. Therefore, there is no need for a comparabie levei of impact anaiysis. However, the DEIS will address the potential for airpon water supply welis to affect the City of Hastings' municipai welis. (See pages V1-12 weter suppiy and V1-16, groundwater.) 1. Analyses to date have not identified any potential impacts on the City from stormwater generated at the proposed airport site. The stormwater transmission corridor from the site to the Mississippi River proposed for evaluation is outside the cor�orate boundaries of the City and is expected to be a freestanding' facility without any linkage to the City's stormwater management program o� facilities. There does not appear to be any basis for modification to the APE. I 'i �`_ <�,�,��`'�•� �. SIERRA CLUB � �: �, �'�""`� A7wi6 Snr Cha�n •SILxltA' t c.; �*'LUE) �� Wgal Finney M�tropolttan Alrporb Commixion 8040 28th Avenue South Mlnnaapoiia, MN 55430 Dur Mr. Finnay, Juty t, 7995 Th��B Y�+ ��P�9 �omrnenb on tM Dual Track A4port Plannfng Proceae Emir«�monw �mpact srawrrent (oS7 seca,d anas. scopiny Repac tt s.ema 'amodiwe that trt� MeaopoUtan Ak�wrts Commisslon (MAG7, afla spenaing mdeoru over smverm Yw� �Y�W tha MSP ard Now Airport Altematlwa, Ptsna ro eonaida aii aher altsmaWes in only aix monthal 1 tqpe all attamativea a» a.�wlly a^alyzed and conaidered balor� ihs aNectlon d ihe prefertod ariemattvs. TM Skrn GuD rocopnizea thc major rde of lraruFwttetlon in determine�g amYonmental quaitty. Transportatbn ii a maja conwmx of anxgy� puticWury af peVdeum, and tranaportatlon fxtlitlea exert a dominant inftumce m land uao patterns. hartsportation pianninp tao often pays IIttN atientlm m tta need for enxgy confmaUon in transpartarion, nor to the dsairabiliry d ancaraging those modea wl�ieh poilw bast and aro moat spving d land. AY nnemativea �hadtl be anetyzed 'm tertns d • whieh ara lens anxgy imensive antl less reaourca imemiva, • whkh ancarnQa desiraCla iand use panems and eauae minimal further enaoachment on tlw iand, • which rWuce ak and noise poliutlon, • whld� avoitl trie aeatlon of fuiiPoea which ue domineenng antl disruptive, • which subordnau tramportaUon pianninp to Cw goW ol aMe�cing M� quality M IHe in aettleC areas. . . . , , Tho sNminatlon trom furtlier co�si0eratlon of C�e H{g�-SpaeA Interdty Raii eoncept which proposed dNersion of pasaongets/operatloru hom tho MlnneapoiWSamt Paul (MS� alrport Mrough high speed raii service to MadboNMfbvaukee/Chipgo atwws tl�at MAC corttlnuea w take too nartav a view d attemativaa ro ba crnaiciered in this EIS. Tronaportatlm planning shoukl tak� a unifNd, comprohensive New d aU transportation modoe, albwinq saisctlon of tAa moda moat wtabte ta a qiven tasic. Ths Hlpti-Speetl I+nraty Rail concept �hould tw eombined with the Suppfamental A�+Port coneept to asaia an Imeantecf A1lemative to the MSP uW N�w Airyort Atternativea. Floro are sortN Wsa� cm�etnk�fl an,inieyaied A71�maVva: • Aban �0% of tho pres�M MSP tratfic �ropional� chanst� frei0ht, 4aneral aviation, mllttary) coWtl W asrvetl NuwAan. Edsonp und�r.Wlliad avpata (Rxhutrr, Dulutn. Saint C7ou4 SalM PaW, e�a) ean serv� as miM-huW and fMegrated into en intartnodal tranaportatlon system eonnecti�p those supplementa! airporb to MSP, Minnenpolia, Sairtt paW, and a hiph apeetl raii link system. • TAs cnmWnation al usirp suppiamantW afrporu to roduco tratfie m MSP and high apeed tail m provida an Wtemative to eir travM will pradude a new nufway anA termina! at MSP. • Hiqh spesd rali b an emerpinp techndopy banp embraced try�all major indusvia8zed �uu«�s around sne wor�a � • RaN aoluDons are nat depmdent m a tinpis energy resourca (petrdeum) but rffiher trmoauce flepbiitty (elecmtlty may bs generated by water, wind, pefro{eum, natural pn, etc.j into ths enxgy rasource aide d 1M equaCon. • TM Phase i TrFState High Speed Raii Stud� completetl in 1fl91 conduded tlfal thero u sipnificant potentlal la t�e wxesslW operrtion ot a high apead rail systwn in the M4�noapdis, Saim Paui, Milwaukae, and Chicago cortidor. • Thraph qraatror efficiency, hiph apsed raii may beneffi the Mirmesott aeonortry by r�kkJn9 tranaportaCon casu, k�aoasinQ onorgy savinQa. aeatln9 jobs, and impra»np omironmemai quality. • A high s�eed nB system ahould ind�dc Nnks hom da�mtovm MMneapolp (Nera is tho dd nitroad station just wattinp for rostaation) end Saint Paul (there is iha dd taWosd �taUon which mfpM stltl b� uubte) which go to MSP, Roehester, and ea�twnrtl. • A hiph speed raN aystem b campetltivo when wDsidies are olhmnated m othx fama d Oansportatim ttwt are enerpy iMensive and environmantally �armtul. Fa exampe, tM cab W tho Ait Ttaffic Contrd System shoWd be boma try users o} that syrtem. Statea end laca)ities iawing bonds ta highway consmictlon (hig�ways to a new air� sAwid pay bond costs hom road-�aer dwfles, and na subaidze them from genenl rovsnuea. ' MY �flh sPeed rall system must bs inteprated inm bcel mass transportation ayatema for surtdes� cowdinatlon. Such nn inbgrazed Attemmivs tequres MAC to step badc gnd graap tha big picNre. MWbns have baen spent tocuainp dosey an me MSP antl Now Alrporl Attemauvas. Naw, la4 start considerinp broaG sdutions tnat take inW accourrt both environmental quality antl tha Img tarm avai�ability ot reso�rces. _ Sincerely, .�G��L"'" "!/(i'''�"\ Mark Warnoi AitpoR Ipuas � � t}i3 Fik6 S�ree� SE, 5nik /31a • Mimnpolia, A4V SS114 •(6t2) J�9•3853 i ( __J . A. A. MAC wiil examine whether integrating the high-sF rail alternative with the suPplementai avport aiterna wouid meet Year 2020 awation requirements wher supplementai airport study becomes available later summer. � .� � ,;�� State S�nator �`� ,en� ,� � � 05 •�� Lice Cl.aus�n9 � f. . •��' ::�fi - � a�'; : .,. - ....-- .� .��, _ t�,4�,;:1• �� June 29, 1995 Glen Orcutt Poderal Aviation Administration J1lrpona District Office, MSP-ADO-600 6020 28th I�venue South, Room 102 . lSintteapolis HN 55450-2706 Daer Mr. Orcutt: Z appreciata the opportunity to eoaanent on the Seco�d�Phas� S:_niTn Reporc for the Dunl Track Airport Planning Proeesa Envizonmental Impaet Statement (EIS). I am plenaed thac the ataze of Wisconain haa zepreaencacion on the Metropolitan Airport Co�ie�ion Dual Track Policy Overaiqht Taak Force. I urqe you to continue the Poliey Ovezsight Tnek Porce and Technical Committee during the EIS proceea. it ie very imponant that the incerasca oi the citizena oL illsconain be represenced duriaq chi� period of the airport planninq proceea. The Natlonal Park Service and the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Rivervay ahould be included in the agenciee to be consulted reqarding pocential impacts the axpnneion and/or relocation of the riinneapoli�/St. Paul Airport may have on the St. Croiz and Miesiaaippi Aiver Nationnl River and Recreation azea. Protection of our riv�re and wildliie i� imperative. Th• propoaed seone of the atudy of tha transportntion system expnnaion inducecl aevelopment impncts appeern a�ceptable. My oriqinal purpoae in addresainq the issue oi possible relocacion of the MSruteapolie/St. Paul Snternationel Airport vaa to determine how tiieconain vould be impacted by auch a relocation. i am eoncerned nbout che environmental and induced developmens impactn of any new or axpanded bridqes over tha St. Croix or Kiaaia�ippi rivers which mny be requized co hnndle tralfic to the airport. I raquest that eosca and funding foz these improvements be included Sn the Dual Track EIS. � A. � A. See Dakota County Response D. ' B. Constructioncostsofroadway/bridgeimprovements due to the New Airport ahernative will be estimated. Noise impect� are aleo a concern, e�pecially for the city of (�. C. The impacts on noise-sensitive land uses will be Pra�cott. Since the impetua to conaider moving the Minneapolis/St. eddressed. Paul Airport haa come from reaidencs around the airport, it ia very important that ve know the impact� for pNL 60-75+'noise levels. The EIS should addrea� impacts oE varioue noine level� on people, domestic animals and wildlite. Thank you for tha opportunity to commenc on thin document. If you have queations, pleaae let me knoa. Sincerely, Ali�ce C uain�� ( State Senator � lOth Diatrict �.. , AC/ef Sutc Capnd. P.O. Bo� 'EEZ Maqiwn. Wt 3370'7.7Ed3 i-800.86]•I092Toi1•Frre s 60b.266.;743Mrfiwns 71�•2�3-1790 Menqtnome U 07/U/199� 39:37 71326Z3733 . 9tOrt,n�KIm6U� WB pa[{ 01 -. July 0 , 1993 TO: NpN FirvMy . .. NNboDditan AMOorts Commiaaion FROM: warWa &own RE: tirport Scoping Ooetrrwrrt. Ernironmmttsl Imwct Stetement I sm concemsd that you tuw d�eidsd thet k ia urweeasary to punw furtMr sNdy of tha �rvNonmernd impsct on Wiid �M Sesrtic RMrs. 1 rodiza shat you tl+ink tM impact would be �q�mr�l�nt. with �id»r buiidirq a new airport in Dskon Cainty a expanOinp the airport st its pesont sit�. You Mw nat tek�n irrto aceount, howswr, sM 'no aetion' ahemetive, whieA ttill is � visblo oodan. I conanw eo WG�w thet. no� aNy an your aoj�etivav fa fueuro �h ttswi innateE. but tMt s'r travsi may w�M dscrsass owr the nsxt d�ud� and b�yaW, dus to tM rsddly �dvancinq siaevonie aps. 1 hw� obrsrvsd in my busirnss thet, ewn in tM las[ 2 yesrs, busrnsa eir vwN is an �xp�nso compur�s �n MVDY to avoid. wiM dw adwnc of E-msi! �nd vid�o teh- ea�(�nneinq. On what do you now baaa your poj�etiorut lt it esnnot D� irrefuabty dtmorutratsd that Urn ia � pr�uinp n�ed to exWnd fa bw'Id newl airpon tscilieiea, tMn to pursw tM studr ot n�w or axoandrd airport ovaona is talv. Finetly, plsas� respond to my queation obout how mue� money has baan apeM ao fm on tt+o 'dwi uaek' midy. and what is yaa budpet fa tM nsxt yea�i Sk�eenlY. 4N" _ " ��•u �'i+ . � Wand� 8�own N 8464 1323 Saest Pnscott. WI 54021 , C+. C. The Draft EIS wili include a discussion uf impacts on wiid and scenic rivers. Aviation activity forecasts ere the basis for determining the scope of fut�re facility ►equirements for MSP and a new airport; therefore, the MAC expended a significant levei of effort to insure the integrity of the forecasts. Eariy in the forecast process, a pubiic scoping session was conducted to solicit comments and recommenda- tions from the general pubiic. Three expert panel sessions were convened to review emerging trends in the aviation industry, socioeconomic trends and forecast methodoiogies. The panels comprised recognized individuals from the airiines, the FAA and Iocai and state socioeconomic offices. The panelists recommended that, in addkion to a base case forecast, atternative forecests be developed to measure the impact of changes to various assumptions. The MAC studied 12 alternative forecast scenarios, which tested the effects of: 1. Higher than expacted regionel economic growth 2. Lower than expectad regional economic growth 3. An oil priceltax shock 4. A low cost airline initiating service at MSP 5. Sensitivity to high travei costs 6. Reduced airline hub activity 7. Maximum airiine hub activity 8. FAA growth in aircraft size (i.e., using larger aircraft than assumed in the base case► 9. High regional/commuter aircraft activity 10. Low regional/commuter carrier activity 11. Fuli potentiai international market 12. Restructured airtravel demand (assumes siow growth in business traveil. Some alternatives produced higher foiecast levels than the base case, while sume produced lower forecast leveis. in addition to the base case forecasts and tweive alternative forecast scenarios, three scenario combinations were also devaloped. The possibie eftects of rapid reil/maglev and teleconferencing on.air travei demand were also analyzed. The findmgs are presented in, Long- Term Comprehensive Plan, Volume 6, Revised Activiry forecasts (December 1993). The MAC is tracking passenger and aitcraft activity and comparing them to the baseline forecasts. To date, both passenger enplanements and aircraft operations are growing faster than the base case forecasts. MAC will provide these costs to you. 7he budpet for 1996 has not been estabiished. �* N6�61 t.Stt � pr��, WL SWl! Nipel FnneY NMnopolitan AirD� Canmission 6040 28th Ave. S. Mpta.. MN 55450 July 2, 1995 Dsar MAC: I am writirq in rmaP�e to tM Scopinp Document (EIS) baeause my rime wee too eparo to tsstify Jtu» 2�. in Hastinqa. Fust, bt m� edd my vdce to ottwro who find in unimepinabis to lesve a full discloaurs of tha impaet on wiid snd xertic riwn ak ot s comWeheneive EIS. Even if it is Wlisved Uut tha ppnpariaon ot tlw �sots River Vd1eY end [he St. Crdx / Mississipp River Vsiieya would p� ��yesh, withan tMe apacifip, we, tha pubiie, eannot be eertain. Na ia k pouible to compare the impact of s new s'upott, a axpansion of MSP, with the 'no ection' altemauve. Socond, aa a physician. I question tha wixlom ot invidng (by �xpansionl mas iMamerional vavsl wNch may posa � Pubiic Malth risk sour eree by increaainp exposuro to intettiow diseaxe. Or. Michael Ostarhdm, hesd ot epidemiology at the Minnaeota Heeich Depsranent, inlpma me that hi� ottiee hee hequern dixuasionn with [h� eiriinea lpatticulerlY Northwestl �bout tha challenqes pwad by resistant and emerging apeniams, as weil aa ocher heeith ielated issuss. He doea na fwesee che Heaith DeDartment imposing uavel rostrictiw�.+. � think, however, the quastion of aecuracy ot future air uaffic poiections, and the economic. aoeial, snd Msith cons�quencas of incroasing the capacity of any airpon needsto be eo�sidered xriouslY as pert ot tha comprehensive EIS. I believe that, fa ths faesseable futwe, it is bener to stny tM eause and that the 'no action' altemative ia the better part of wisdom. Lsstiy, let ma brirW to yau anerrtion that a sixee6la gra.rp ol ertista hom both sides of the hAississippi and St. Gax Rivan haw organixed as Artists Aqeinst Another Airport (AAAAI. Aa en nttist by avxation. � jdn them in concems that an and tourism • by which the arta pro�per • ua likely to sufter if a new airport ia built in Dakote County. TM degrodation in �e�iquenesa ot ths rive� towns by the forces of generic economic develoDmant u arnichetical to the eru. I hope the EIS will take into consideraaon ail of Mesa concerns. Sincorely, �%2 J �*�'��-�--,�r.� Phyllia Goldin, M.D p,g, I vtut tha[ thm cmtlY and absurd 'remote runway opdon' has now been eliminn[ed, aa a rosuh of tho ncern study. B. A. The Draft EIS wili include a discussion of impacts on wild and scenic rivers. B. See Wanda Brown Response 8. The EIS wili address the sociai and economic impacts associated with each alternative. The Center for Disease Controi Quarantine Oivision was contacted regarding. the issue oi airports as a source of foreign d�seases. A prelimmary literature search was also conducted. While several st�dies anaiyzed the spread of infectious diseeses among crew and passengers, none dealt with overail community risk due to internationai eir service. The literature reviewed showed the risk o} controcting an intectious disease from air travel is eMremely rere. 7he division is not aware that the rate of contraction for any forei�n infectious disease is higher in. communities with extensive international air serwce versus other communities. international trovelers currentiy are served via both nonstop and connecting flights at MSP. Robert M. xoc¢� 3527 20t:� Avenne Sonth M innea polis. M N 55407 l612)?24•5893 28 June 1995 Mr. Ngel Finney 3Se�olitan Airgcrts Ccs.s::�cn bGAO ZSth Avenue Suuth Muineacolis, MN 55�50 RE: Scoping Docament for Dual Tncic Eavironaeental impact Stabeaunt Dear Mr. Finney: L Intmduction 'ttee environaee�tal impad statea►ent (II51 bea►8 Prepared for tfie dual tracic af.r..:: g!�..^�.�.b r.^^^ �.^ a"•.-� ��o '�o�^h! ltte i9sues of ^?.c�l c.:..'�c chsnge, cr gceenhouse wazming, invotvad 'm the possable ocpansion of air fadiities in the Twln Gdes. Unfordmabely, the cuaent `Secand F'hase Scoping Report' dce� not p�rnsaiS ytale tfiat �renhouee ia�ac� will be siudied � the EL. 'li�is is a aericnia de5denry that tlte MetraEwiitan Airpocta Commiyaicm, the Fedecal Aviatlon Administradon, and the M'mne9ota Envii+onmec►tal Qualih' Board s�ild tea�edy, �Speaficat}y, !he IIS must (1) estimate ti►e Sreenhouse � emission� aasodated wit3� the Pmposed Projecb� (2) o�a�ine t� �Paw and feas�bility of alternatives in light of pae�'bte federai greenhouse Sas rEduc�nn policies, (3) evatuabe the aitematives far c�cy with in�ra�onal, �tional, and loal mm�mita�tb to contcoi g�reenhouse gas eaussian�t, and (4) aeeese measiues to rr.duce ainzaft emiasions and deativid for air traveL II. The Nature of the Problem Gbbal ciimate d�ange relabes to the accunu�lation � gases ('green}►ouee gaees') in tfie atn�osphere that traD �, P��Y �8 �� temperatures on the planet and altering climatic patbema Fossii Euel use is tesponsib{e Eor ti►e bulk of � gae emis�one, uecluding rarbon dia�xide, methane, nitmua oxides, and Pcecutsoxa °f tropoepheric ozone. For human sodeties and natural ecoeysbem� which are adapbed for a particular climate, the threat of rapid clluutic change is very �s. Sud► climalic change threatens to distupt agriclilture, damage fore�ts, raise ocean levels, and e�nguish many,end�ngered spedes. Human socetie� may be forced to mnfront wid�pmad augration, eerioue economic discuptione (�pedallY relatec► to natural m,yources and public utilide9), and enhanced public health threab due to extceme weather conditions. Three facb hightight the magnitude of the threat Fitst, the greenhause gases arP long-lived in the amwsphere (carbon dio�de hae an ata�spherit residence time of over 100 years� and thw the impacm witllx irrevecs�ble for ssweral generations. Second �h� 8� levels ate aireacty signiHcantly elevated above pre-indu.slriat tiaties (360 ppm compared to 28(i ppm 200 years ago), but du full effect of prior rmissioru will not be feit for'decadea to centuries' due to natural delay mechanisms.� 17►ird. in order to stabilize carbon diaxide at today's aiready elevated level wouid require immediate reductions in emiaeions of at lraet 60%! Thue, if We public wantg to try to t+educe d�e threat of seiioue ctimatic ci�ange, actian is needed no�w. Orte area ti�at heu iatportant gceenhwse gas impllcatione ie air travel and ot�ez tranyportation method.�. In 1991, the U.S. OESce of Technnlogy Aeeesement (OTA) ceporbed that air txansportatian accaunted for roughty 4596 af the nation's carbon dimtide emissions, az►d the transportation secior as a whok aarn�nbed fos 3296 of nationai �ons. The OTA ew:imabed that t:an.�ortation-celated ca�bon dio�ade emivsions would isa�ease by 25% by 2()10 '(aJasuming cnrmsit tcende and cegutaliona's Such ina+eas� are tutia�aeptable if tt►e tttxeat of xrious ciimatic change is to be zeduced. �Robmt M. Bou tv�a�ed n ALA. ia 1491 hw ti� 9amQ� F�tiad+ d hWic ARnin. Uoi�asiry o( Minra+ ud • J.D. i� 1997 has tM U�iveniry ot Afimeusou La S�iool. Rm sr � mambar of e!e Mimr�polie Emi`oem�aW Commiuioo hom l991 m 1999 eod • aitecw. ur 4t;.o.soe... tar ,. Eeerer•Effir.ieat Eco.omr hom 199� w I9ss. � �orfu. ot rKe.oJop e,.wmat. us. co.�rn.. c..«:« gt o.�s: s�.o. w e,d.�e g�y� ss e�w. 2-9 q99�) t:rarn• orA R.ponl. i �jd, r 3. I : i ' I I'— Costa�ents Ot� Airport L)ual PzOce�e ETS Srnph►8 Robert M. Hogg pa� 2 IQ. Ft�ecoIIta�endatiotfe The �propoeed Scope of E�nvirona�tal Impad Statea�ent' �iwoild acpresety atale that ti►e gxemhouse gas emis�otu a.4socated with airpoct expansion and operations �vill be thorougiilq studied. Without good infoc�matian on g�lwuse Sas em�snons, tfse IIS will fail to adeqnately infotm d1e pubiic, Congres.a, the Mint►esota legi.vlature, and stabe atsd federai agenciea about the g�reer�house dwice� relatir�g to the P�P�'d �rt �F�'� ��Y� the ELS ahould • F.atlmate the gieenhauee gae emission� for the akemative� considered cnaspared to 1990 emiseions for (aj airplu�e flighb departumg and arriving. (b) on-ground atrport aperatioree� and (c) ground transport aervicng d�e aupor� ae well as (d) any otfier sigs►ificant sounees of grra�houx gas emissions identified in the IIS proeess. (The P�='Y gc�enh°u°e ga°e� are mrbon dioxide, aYthazie, nihous oxide, chlomf2uorocarbans, and precvrsore of tropoepheric ozone.) • Forecast air travei and emiesiau in dte event af a carbon tau or other fecleral P��i' �Piea�enbed to aocount far the gteenhouse gas �ians and other environa�etttial costs of fosail fuela It is liketq tfiat in an age of global dia�ate change, faesil fuels — rspeoailY mal and oil — muid bemme ve:y rxpes�sive, and ti►e:eby discws�age air travel.` e9pedaIlY in light of less energy intensive albernatives sueh as �dng.� Evatuate whcKh� ti►e altea�ative� eonsiderEd aze co�s�stent with the vacioun governmentai mma�itmenla to =eduuce �eenhouse gas emission�, inciuding (a) the United Stabes' obliga8ons under the �,+*++Fwodc ConvenHon on �mate Ch�� whith the United States ratified in 1992, whicfi commib the Unibed Stabe� to stabitizuig carbon dioxide emiseions at 19901evels Iry 2000 and ultlmabety stabllizu�g atmoepherie concentratione of gn�enhouee gases, (b) President Clinton's Cliaute t�tange Adion Plan announced in 1993, and (c) the Minneapolis-Saint Paui Ucban COz Reduclion Program • Aseese aritigation a�easur�s, such as airaah eH'idency improvementg,� that would redtue eauseions, as well as telernmmunintian albematives, fuet taxes, or incseased air firavel ta�ces based on fuel eoneumption that wauld rednce air trave! and ib attesdant greenhouse gas emissiona Tlw information will inform the publie, Cvngresa, the ATinnesota tegislatuse, and st� and federal agendes about the climatic implications of this pmjed, enabling the public to make a choice about the futuxe of air travel in the Twm Gties. W'uhout such inforaution, informed choices about global cllmate will be diffiailt and the IIS would be grossty 'snadequate. Sincerely, �J�''`�`�. �"Za� Robert M.Hogg �y{, r�6 tbL 2-t (a5tiat 1rt6o'�s�tal Paa.� oa Gi'a�s C�ah}. sY, r �+9 t r` si. °Sfi i� r 1•19 (•. .. IF�+ �azo . . oo.w e. .m iopeee.aa d.�.a is . ai...is.a rarep b evd�a (orboo dio:ide).7: �� Rielod stw�. 'Moat Netion A1iw tM Atric oa Fabsioe-Costro! Pfeas.' 266 �Q 1939. t439 (19At) (�otin= t6at w.an! satioed ;xliom pi�e�' wrais '6i�hm tue� os e�arythis{ Gos 6ose beatiat (ssl w pwtine7. �3a! MA Rsya4 �, r 149 ('Ior�a ura paopvs .ilt d.pwd aa ... ba'rW � rod far trnd (a0.. tirw.6l iseo.uiom is ... ul�atiao�) ... 7. �.d id. m 161 tbL S-6 (mdiai t!m �'aaiII �ffiao�cr aot I» i.Qfo.ed SOx aadar the QTA'� 'wa;i rsaeio' m nda�• Rwabm� tr eawio++ a�rpaallr hon trrrporntios eoepasd w 19i7 Io..L). A. B. r A. h is estimated three percent of ;raft account for two to iioxide and nitrogen oxide ng of fossil fuels (Pollution rcraft: Vi/orld Wildlife Fund Paper (1994)- an update of �ironmental impacts and International, 1991) and to grow in the future (AiL m from Jet Aircraft Could �enerai Accounting Office, s slightly lower than the �ped by , the Office of t (�h� �ip b� Deqrees: �se Gases: Office of , 1991). However, most at cruising ehhudes, not wnue iaung or aurmg ieKeorr. Emissions of criteria pollutants (CO, NO„ SOx, HC, and Particulates) from aircraft operations, avport surface equipment and transportat�on to and from the airport will be considered in tha EIS. The EIS will aiso evaluate relative aircraft energy consumption es weli as the energy consumption associated with airport ground operations and vehicle access. B. See Wanda Brown Response 8. C. The Climate Change Action Plan adopted by Clinton Administration in Octobet of 1993 I 1992 . This pian included four policy actions with respect to transportation: (1) reform�ng the federal tax subsidy tor empioyer-provided parking; (2) adopting a transportation system efficiency strategy"; (3) promoting qreater use of telecommuting; and (4) developm� fuei economy labels tor tires. Of these, the transportation system efficiency strategy',relates directiy to air transportation. Impiementation of these strategies would be accompiished by the promuigation by the U.S. EPA of the Transportation Conformity rule. Transportation conformity wiii be addressed in the EIS. The Minneapolis-St. Paul Urban CO, reduction plan wiii be evaluated as part of this analysis. D. Most of the efforts to reduce areenhouse aas emissions from air transportat�on are bemg considered et the internationai level. For example, a new standard for reducing NO, emissions by 20% was agreed to by international Civii Aviation Organization in 1993. While reductions in totai air travel and increases in engine efficiency may heip mitigate the greenhouse impacts of aircreft emissions, the location of a particuiar airport within ttie metropolitan atea wili have little affect on these impacts.. Demand for air travel can affect these global emiss�ons. However, this demand is generated by a wide range of factors such as population, the regionai economy and national and international trends. Although the design of the airport may increase or reduce greenhouse emissions marginaliy (tor example, by requiring longer taxi distances or by affecting delay time on the groundl, these effects are small in comparison with emissions that occur while the aircraft is in the air. Mitigation measures to reduce energy consumption and criteria poilutant emissions frorn mobile and stationary sources associated with airport elternatives will be examined in the EIS. These measures would both indirectly and directiy have the efiect of also reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Jua� 27. 1995 F'�'L' ?k?` Airp«a Dw. J'.!. "•° °rcu" JUN 2 8 t995 F�d�ral Aviatlon Adninistzicion AScpotcs DLitziec Offiea, lSSP-ADO 600 6020 28th Avanw South, Room 102 , Mltm�apolis, !Qi 55450-2706 Dsaz Mz. Orcutc: 21us� vrittm eoo�nta as� r.ap�ccfully subsitted co rou in � ciwly fuhion Sn r�sasds co th� S�eond Phaa• Saopin6 R�porc for ch� �wl iraek Airport llanninb Pzx�ss Eerviroeis�nul Iupaec Sucewnt (EIS). 1. She airporc-nuds pro��tad iot cfia futux• hrv� air�ady b��n ad�wud dovnvatda ac l�aat onc• in this pzotu�• Curr�nc pro��etlon� hin;� 6�av11y upon cha •hub and apolu' sod�L us�d by Noschwsc Aixlicus. Ss ic r�uonabl• bued upon vha[ w lmov today co azp�ec a proflt ori�nc�d alrlin� to conciaua to usa this ucp�cuiw oodslT I'd r�eom��d ch+c the uop� o! th� EIS addz��s ch!•-.Sasu�. Q. Yhe swLs� auurss propo��d co b� ealculaud in th� ESS ar� not s�asurai of noia� bue rathar �sclaatu of noi�♦ l�w ls co M obuin�d by ueh aixport alcaznaclv�. 'Ihesr •scisates ara hu�d upon des¢ top scudy nsults and ar� �od�l sstisaua. Mor� r�ilabl� d+u should b� obttin�d. I'd r�eom�nd chat eh� seop� of �� EIS addr�ss tAli issw and provida for z��l nolaa ruus�a�ncs b� �ad� of aecwl doi��-Tu c-Fly•Ov�r�. Sbis vould Smolv� noisy plan�i b�in6 aeh�dul�d to ily lov w�r •ach of ch� alurnaciv� ait�s (pnf�rably oa vorsc day easu . L� �ala and high hunidity and varn and {»opl� ouuid�) and s�uuru (ob]�ctiv� aad subj�ac) b� obuin�d usin; inscsvwnn and mLs• pan�ls of p�opl�. A �ontruc of laportanu ia th� z�laciv� cdan6e Sa noisa �sp�ct�d by uch alxpott altarnativ�. 7. Th� axial lapaee dw to r�loeacion o! ruSdenca n��da co ineluda cho�• vho r�loeac� dw to r�due�d valu� of ch� ru Sd�ntltl piopezry. Th� radueed qwlity of 11A usxlat�d vith livin6 a�xt co a noisy airpors vili naan W� lo�a of v+ny ruLd�nea aM r�sule in • aoeial r�eerueruring. I'd r�oom�ad th�c th� acop� of th� EIS addr�sa chia issw and provida ascivacas of ch� r�laeiv ehan6�� Sn th�,xu Ld+neial prop�rty valw� tor ueh alzpors � al:srnaclw. 'Ihank you fot youz eonsldsxation. y�• Sixaraly, � r� " � U �yl„ ,� y��,y�/ �:b�.l C„o�n.p,3z.6� OC . �...�.�,, - - - . uQ.2 --�_ 6E0.? — 0.onald L. J�cobson �a0.4 3647 1�3rd Ser��e t7uc ,y,�,� � Re�anounc. 1SN 55068 bo: � eeu.a 630.7 _ 68�.d F- A. A. See Wanda 8rown Response B. B. The noise values prasented in the EIS Scoping Document (as weil as those that would be shown in the EIS hseif) are calculated using the Ff+A's latest version of the integroted Noise Modei (INM). The INM takes into account prevailing weather conditions, various runway-use modes, ncise characteristics of dozens of aircraft and engine types, based on thousa�ds of actuai fieid noise measurements, aircraft operating weights, hundreds B, ot flights tracks, specitic noise abatement procedures, topography and the time of day overflights would occur lnighttime operations are penalized by 10 decibeis to account for residents' �ncreased sen�itivity to noise during the night). INM results have repeatedly been shown to correlate well with comm�nity response to noise. C. C. FAA guidelines tor the preparation of environmental impact statements tor airport projects require an analysis of residents and businesses displaced b�the project and the relocation impacts. It is not w�thin the scope, of the Draft EIS to estimate the numbers and location ot residents who wiii not be directiy displaced by airport development but who choose, nonetheless, to move voluntariiy. f_ � (_� x�noPou�r�.v ,unPoars corK►nssiay sT3.601 DEFT7770�5. $ubdi.iaion 1. ' The follc.in� wMs. tmro and ptvues stult. for �he pur. pmes of ;eLuons i7;.601 w�73.679 ba pvea ihe c�euuno sutr�oicd m �pem. Subd. ='Commw+on' artd -corponuon" eub mnn+ a mnrepolinn air- pons comm�sswn. uran�xcr! and aunes under �be pcaisiom d secncn� s7).601 �q i73.679. $uM1 ]. -Cq .ounai- a'eouaal- mam ihe twem�ns budy W euh d the aua o! �1ima�6s and SG PauL Subd. a. 'Commnsioner meaen a persnn appoin�nl a orker.rise sdecud as, aad afur his qva�ifi�twa uua� ss. a aumba uf che capunrioa Sub7, !. 'Th� crommission«i mrms � qo«um d Ne mrmbas d ihe torpaati,�a acuns u tE� 3o•amn� bodr o( �he axporaooa. SubS. 6. 'Gn�" a'nch dry' a+caas uns d ibe dtia d�tinnapd'u aad 5� Paul. H�on: /9iS . l7 t 4I . 1T�.603 DECI.UU770� Of Pt,'RPQSFS. (c o Uu putpaas d seccon� Q7.60t w 4J�b79 a proa+ou �6e pubtie rdtar. and auional secnn�r: urve puWic iciaut .rom�enieats and necssucv: promae air mwpu�m and vaaspornnat m�rroaueaaL osaooaL ua�s sod toaL m aa�f Nrousd Jus� snic pomou �6e dfic�enc �ata and �anomica! hac�lli�S d au commem: assurr tbe inclwioa of ihis staa m aatiomi sad 'w�anatwnal pro� 6tamf d ait va�ssporta[ion: snd W tl�ou mdt m �le+•eloQ the futl pomaualiues o! �be mevopoliun ua ia [ha suu u an awwa tmmr. aod m cortdau that un .i�h all a�iauoc (adliria in �be rndre nau w u �o po�ide for dK mosi awrumid aad dfeai�Y isse o( aaanautie tatiliva aad sa+ica' ia thu uo: �assurs c!x res�dm� o( rhe meuupoGsan ua c+/ ibe acnimum mriroomrnul impsct from Lr caviption aod rsanspau�iva, aaf w dni mA pwxk !a nau abaumrn� cronvd d viport arn Land use. uH! oJur prwenn•e meawro: aad io td'u nw! iL� earporation shal! axrersu .iih arnl .+s�isw ihe mcw{k+iiva �uunaL the federsl �o�•eromrn� We comausuooa d uanx�w+nauuo d t6u .uce an� ahm maeed m acronsuua u U+r promown aaJ mmlauua K saun+uua and shall seeii w coadina�e in acuc�ua .nih �he amxuuud ac�mua u( �bne boAia. }llua,r. 197J a/J s 91: f 916 c 166 s 7 �Tl.60.1 METROPOLlT.tiY n1itPORTS CWi�[ISS10Y: C7tEAT10�. Subdi.ision I. For tbe purpexs pruv4def ia xezioes �77.601 w�n.079 �he memofwliun airpora commissiaa hss bcrn vea�d ax a pubtic capwauoa. E�etept u prv��ded abenw ia Ltrs 1914. Ghapta LS, the auuace and thc po�ray, rsspoea'bi7des. rir,hn ud o6lipeom uf � corpocatioa ue coofvroeri and ulendni ro�ardaxe .it6 ihs pmrisom u( tAae �wxis, u thn• tw+' nw �nd ss ibey u� nod ud au�• 6�roteer be smmdsd aid tuppkmenud. $ubd 2 TLt mmmuvoo shall be at+ynisxd twetored aad ulmiaw[ted u PtO�ided in Seeooro �7J.601 W 47,7.679. Hkpa,r. I971 e 1� i AS 4'Tl.60r MFMSEASHIP• GOVE3tNM1��'• � $ypdive000 1. '[bc to80.'ins,p�+s� � � �� coasdw�e �Ae mcmbos sad Eo"�6 �` of �De corpor+uaa �Y� (ll A�I d tEs ma++bas and w�*� in a/P�ee lanuuy L 1977. (y�}�a � temaiadc d tl�e termt fa rhich �bry � aPP°tR� or otha+�isc �'�ILe mayor d och d tM dca a a qu�if'�ed raa' iPP°�°� ��' la hit tam ol o(Gcc st maya: �d tbs tauad tar (3� ,� mapbe d tbt eo�m�al d oeb d�dees. appain i7 a tcm d four yas co�a6 1ah'• CITY OF NIDVNEAPOLiS RESIDENTIAL VAL.I7� CHANGES l.� - �Jr wT�wvM �urovmow ruc nn.cn nmarw.n � �: :� .: FACULTY WORKING PAPER NO. 1450 The Effecc of Aiccraft \oise and .�n•port Acci� u� on Residcn�iai Pro��er�� Values: A Sur�e�• Swdp .Ma�viii Frorih,e! Couege o� Commerce ano 8usmess nom�msuauon 8waau oi EconomK ano Bus+ness Research (J(MV�rStly W IUiM�i. UfOina•ChimpaKjn fACULYY NORICSNC P�PER N0. 1�50 Co11�6� of Co�arc• and busi�ess edniniscration Qniv�r�ity of Illinoit ac Urbana•Chaupai6n April t988 Th• Effeccs of nircufc Noise and nicporc nccivicy on R�sidenci�l ?topei[y Valu�s: A Suxvey Study Hacvin Fzank�l. PzoEcasor Wparsmcnc o[ ?conomics Th� au[hoi ia pteissd co acknovled6� assiscaoc� for chis i�sureh froo swaral qua[uti. Th� 0(;ice of R�al Eseau Ruureh and eM t}niwrstcy's desearch board provid�d inporunc financSal suppors. Th• Illlnois �asoaiacion of Realcors fuilitae�d arian6�wncs for cescin6 ch� quu eloanair• and oft�r�d 6�rnrous eooperacion tn d�v�topin6 eh• saopl� of Auieor rupondancs. Ess�ntiil advice on surv�y o�chods and subseantial nsuzah a�siaunee �as zuppll�d by Haei Ftank�l, and dau �ncry and ubulacian s�evicea v�r+ parforn�d by che Univ�rairy'a Surv�y R�sutth' Laboutory. ........ ............ .... MSTRn� Th�s• ia • concinuin6 incer�sc, boch in ch� dowin of saholarly r�s�ar�h and on ch� poliey Eronc, in che efi�ccs ot nai6hberhood awni:ies and dLsas�nictes on r�siden�ial propercy values. �icpores are encicies oi sp�eiil inurasc in chia n6ard. 6n che on� hind, aa hosca co noisy jec tireraft, chay ar� soure�s of a�ajor disaaentty. On che och�r, as cenc�r� oL tztnsportacion, chay suppocc aeonoeic aetivicy a�d proDer:y d�wnd in chs sutaoundln6 re6ion. 6oth ot ches� sswes ar• considsred in che su:�•�� scudy r�pozt�d on h�r�. Th� scudy is focus�d on sooe l5 su6urban �oamunicies around 0'Hsr� Aii'potL. Ot1s of ies sain puryos�s is to aas�ss th� •ff�ec on th� wrkr. for r�sid�ncial prop�rci�s and en prop�:ey valu�s ot aircraic nois�. Thts assassa�nc !s acceopced noc by canvassin6 honeovners abouc chair villin6n�as•co•pay for qui�ur n�iah6orhoods, buc rachar by addressin6 c�•o spaeialisc broupn, it�alcors and appraise:a, uho ar� kno�l�d6eable abouc r�al •stac� otrk� u and pzop�rcy crans�ccioos. A seeond purpoi�, pursued also chrou6h salianc• on ch�s� c++o acoups, is ea davelop infornacion on hou ch� airport Ls �S�ved as a broaC�r �cor.00ie torc• and hov this forca is ssin co atfect busin�sa accivity, prop�rcy narkecz, and property values �mon6 eh� resulcs ot tha scuEy are sh� Eolloving: 1. In n�lbhbozhoods tmpaa:�d Sy �oderace lavals oE aircra£c notsc. cha noisa faetoz Ls ot seeondary i¢poz:ante tor propercy values aa compared co such athat Eaaiors as qualicp o.' n�ighborhood, proxinicy co schools ar.d shoppin6 Lacilitiu , and aaounc o.' q:oo�rcy caxes. 2. Thara Ls aa infosnac:on d�it�i�ncy in the uarkec for noisy rciidancial properti�s, sinae a si�ai::eant s�gmenc of prosp��cive buyers are eich�r ill�inforn�d or unin[ormed abouc ch� nois�. ' l. Shs wrk�e for ra�id�nc:al ?sopascias subjace co aircrafc noise is asymm�crically aff�aced, antl uukmed. 6y .he h�havior oF buyezs and s�ll�rs. Supply is au6oentcd �y che oEfers of some ovnett aeeking co •scap• ch• noisa, vhil� danand is �+�ak�ned as son� prospeaciv� buyers eonsaioualy avoid noisy propersies. 6. Th• survay findln6s aoni:r.e and a<cend ch� resulcs of hedenic scudiea on che eff�ecs of aiceraEc �osse on rasidancial prop�rcy �alues Thr�• s�cs of •scinac�s ot ehos• �t£ec:s are presenced. Speaifically. Lo: axampl�, ch� findin6• i�dlutr. •. Escioaces by Aulcor� of reducclon'a in ch� valu�s of sia6le Cmily dvelllnE� ran61n6 froo ).91 (lov tstinace) co 7 J\ (h16h eecinau ) �Cot uod�rae• nois• lav�l� (65��0 Ldn), fron 9.51 co 17.0� for su6sca�cial nois• l�v�la (70-75 tAn), and fros 11.2t co 21.61 for sevece nois• levels (75-80 Ldn). b. Consiscencly tov�r •scinaces by appralseza :han by Real:ozs o; the asoune at ch� propiccy value reduacion aceribuubl• co aireraft noise Appiais�r eacioaus ar�, oo ch� aw u6�. about 70� lowr. c. Consitcencly�lo�er escivaces for wl[i•fanily than single fauily dvellin6s of [h� aeounc of ch� propeicy valu� reduccion. f ,, � �aui s��+��- �SDO 1 µ' F1vL.S. �75L ql;nntapou.o, mN 55423- — - ---..� �.�.� y.s= .�___ ---�- �.�.- �"'.�;-"�.�, .. .. _.. ._. .- -�---� -- — _ . , � �7iJ�c�--,.mO�_.,u�.�rT—a�c-_r-�r�n.� - _�...�ay-��• � �.1�',�/��.�y-��-��---��- --- -- � .. tj ,�.. i .Gt ,- �.r�i1 ay�,L'.�%id�-- /�.�! .,.s�-��— _ ----�-....%��f��_�..u�-.=%i1 . �"�,, _�_.'�, °�' ` .��.-.n.d_.��^-�--_..�O..�i�.�_._ �r-.G1�./yJ>�-�u"=Q'.a--...c.d'."– _Gc.Lr_.L�...�..t.r�'- _ _--0_`''�o__�t: . .�`..`��•.-_�s�►�•.� -� '— I._ �, ��..� �-��-�-�--- ' - -----'� "o ��a-'=..��- "�..' -.....��r'°',..�'.-- �'- --�'''`= �•—...� .O`�t�G-�--�...-�+e.-c., – f�...��✓_ I, ?�_z�i_r1.e �...�0-.�.�=-�-�, ..a-a'=t.r�o-.�..-.7Y' � ��,o.z,SGe.c.-�c..�..c...-.-4L...u-�-_..G�i �-c.�.�'/—��+-� :/t'rdv-�+�r_ 2%.�s.—t.�' _�y s O�'-��-- --�"'�--- �;,.�,;,�,_�'`"� �-.2_cz-__L.f'•r.T 'Ge`'T;-�-�-- I _ I � 1 C!`- ..,G�.-,/� �� •y_,f��-- : � _�-��.� - _...�:.�.. _. �� -.-.-- �� _ .—.,�r�,--...�.�,�.r- � _d�--_...�-_._.�.-..,�na�-- -� __._.....1�/c�s�s>.�_.6� o_..,.�-�.�-Paa-'-'��---._. ---.-.��r.�_�'._di� 2`'.z:.=��s-�--.. ...- ------ l ' r'..�-�''f""��,...,,G� ��- .� �, �J,` � ---- --•---`�-''� .,,G�' . . .�,/'_c.�u-t,- �Y� a � .. i."_s. .�s'../%-�-. o- ,.G� .,�.a. d- .� �'I-- �`� �� ,,�' �- —�---SO�n�.. ��r:�. ./�a� 4r .,u�-�d.a� .�n� .+'L- Z'"•u"' '��- I , M�.�..- ��.i.•- i'i�,y�iah►, t� yi°�ii• D.-.a.-�.�Ls�""Q-�"1" �%�0 MMnMou O�partmeM of Tranaponatlon G� hansportatbn Building " �95 Jann oe�ana Bouievarc • Samt Paut: Minneso�a 55155� �899 612-779-5071 July 5, 1995 Hr. Niqel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt Hetropolitan Airports Comm. Federal Aviation Administration 6040 28th ]lvenue South 6040 28th Ave. S., Suite 102 lSinneapolis, ?linnesota 55450 Hinneapolis, Hinnesota 55420 SIIBJECT: DQIIL TIUCA AZRPORT PROCESS - SECOND STAGE SCOPING REPORT Dear Hr. Finney and lir. Orcutt: Tha ifinaesota Department ot Trnnsportation (Hn/DOT) bas had active iavolvement in tha Dual 17ack Airport Planning Process, including participatinq in a study o! the regional transportation impacta with the !latropolitan Council, Wisconsin Department ot Transportation, and the Hatropolitan Airports Commission. We look lorvard to continued involvament in thin important transportaion planning eltort. With this miad, ve otter the tollovinq cot�enta on tho Second Staga Scopinq report. ' Tranaportation impact is a czvcial alement o! tbe ¢nvironmental analyais Lor tha Oual Track procesa. The related environmental, social, and economic impact o! providing ground access to either a nev airport or an expanded Sinneapolis-St. Paul 2nternational i 111rport (HSP) is a necessary component o! the intormation needed by the Hinnesota Legislature, in ordar to make an intormed decision. � This intormatlon has been lackinq in the Alternative Environmental Documents prepazed to date. Mn/DOT remains concerned that the selection ot the West Terminal Alternative, as part of the option to eupand at existing HSP, vill have siqniticant adverse impacts to the reqional highway system it, as it now appear�, planned expansion ot Z-�SW and I-494 is unable to be implemented. Whila ve are disappointed with the alternative selected tor Eurther study, !Sn/DOT remain� committed to working cooperatively to addresa thesa impacts and davelop appropriate mitigation maasuras tor the upcominq Environmental Zmpact Statement (�S) • Follovinq are co�ents on specific reterences in the Second Phase Scoping Report: Page V-35 We concur that social impacts resultinq lrom chanqes in surlace transportation patterns need to be addressed. Paqe V-41 We concuz that transportation accesa impacts naed to ba determined and vill vork cooperatively vith you in evaluating the details ot this issue. Page VS-1 Altarnativa 2- Nev 711rport, should be deacribed as nev highvay access trom the airport to the reqional highvay system, not as accass trom TH 55 to the nev aizport. Page VI-5 The cost ot neoessary improvements to the regional ttansportation system must be included in the analysis of Economic Impacts. Paga VI-11 Wa concur vith tha specitic items to be addrasaed and vill aork cooperatively vith you, the Netropolitan Couacil, and the iiisconsin DOT in ordez to detarmine the specilic transportatlon access impacts of all altarnatives. The results of our study o! the Supplemental aizports Aiternativa vill not ba available vithin the timelrame of Second Phase Scopinq. Hn/DOT reco�ends that tbis Altesnative be included !or lurther study in tha EIS at this tlme. Nhen the results of this study are available, they can ba included in the EIS or an amended Scopinq Decision can ba issued as appropriate. The Minnesota Department o! Transportation accepts your ofler to ba a Cooperatinq Aqency !or the development o! the ledaral £nvironmental Impact Statement !or the Dual Track Airport Planning Process. Xe look forvard to continuinq cooperation in our et2orts to resolve the .crucial transportation issues raised in the Dual Track process. Thank you !or the opportunity to comment and be involved in this process. �Sinceraly, �� ._._. Dr. Lavrence E. Poote, Chie! i1�vlronmental ofSicer Office o! F�vironmental Servicea A. A. This has been changed. B. An estimate of these construction costs will be included.