1995-01-11 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
AGENDA
JANUARY 11, 1995 - 8:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Welcome to Metropolitan Airports Commissioner Louis Miller,
and MAC Staff (invited).
4. Approval of December 14, 1994 Meeting Minutes.
5. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence:
a. Richfield Part 150 Buyout Update for December, 1994.
b. NOISE Newsletter for December, 1994.
6. Unfinished and New Business:
a. Discussion with MAC Commissioner Miller and Staff
Regarding Mendota Heights/ Eagan Corridor and Other
Airport Related Matters.
b. Discuss Upcoming MASAC Executive Committee Meeting
Scheduled for January 12, 1994.
c. Discuss Upcoming Tour of Communities Surrounding MSP
Sponsored by the Metropolitan Council.
d. Discuss Status of Dual -Track Airport Planning Process.
7. Other Comments or Concerns.
8. Adjourn.
Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request
at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120
hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every
attempt to provide the aids, however;: this may. not be possi . e
on short notice. Please contact•CityAd m#nistratiA.•
1850 with requests.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
DECEMBER 14, 1994
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations
Commission was held on Wednesday, December 14, 1994, in the City
Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was
called to order at 8:10 o'clock P.M. The following members were
present: Beaty, Fitzer, Leuman, Stein and Surrisi. Commissioner
Olsen was absent. Commissioner Olin was excused. Also present
were City Administrator Tom Lawell and Senior Secretary Kim
Blaeser.
I ,
The Commission welcomed guests Paul Sondrall, intern and Bruce
Wagoner, MSP Tower Chief.
Chair Beaty submitted a copy of a letter written by himself
which appeared in the November 23, 1994, Highland Villager.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner
minutes.
Commissioner Stein seconded the motion.
Leuman moved approval of the November 9, 1994,
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
Chair Beaty inquired on the status of Dr. Olin's recovery and
asked that staff send flowers.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF
VARIOUS REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the ANOMS Report for
October, 1994. Chair Beaty noted that the number of
complaints is down compared to recent months. Administrator
Lawell stated the number of departures using Runway 11L is
down dramatically from August.
With regards to the Runway
percentages to 1994 percenta
Operation total 34 percent ve.x.
stated that the total number c)
about 300 from 1993.
lort, comparing 1993
11L departures - All
percent in1993. He
ions in October is up
In response to a question from Commissioner Stein, Mr. Wagoner
stated there is a certain percentage of error in recording
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 2
information between the MAC and FAA as the computer system can
be affected by different elements such as human error and
weather complications (lightning strikes).
Chair Beaty pointed out that jet carrier operations are up 437
from 1993. He further stated during nighttime operations,
Runway 11L was used 104 times verses Runway 11R being used 97
times. He stated the use of both runways is up from 1993. He
inquired why Runway 11L seems to be the preferred runway
during nighttime operations. He further stated that during
calm weather conditions, Runway 11L is still the preferred
runway. He stated Mendota Heights seems to be getting more
than its fair share of air noise.
Mr. Wagoner explained that the air traffic controllers have
been instructed to direct air traffic over the corridor. He
further stated that calm winds to an individual on the ground
may not be considered calm by the aviation community. He
further explained that he has instructed the controllers to
pick a specific runway and use it through the entire day if
possible. He has instructed them to not "flip flop" runway
use as he does not want to compromise the safety of the
aircraft.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MSP Monthly
Complaint Summary for October.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Richfield Part 150
Buyout Update for November.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the NOISE Newsletters
for September/October, 1994, and November 1994. Administrator
Lawell stated that Councilmember Smith attended the NOISE
Board Meeting on December 3 in Minneapolis. He stated that a
regional meeting may take place in the Twin Cities.
•a S bI rjoW r rO y1 �3Li 3J�?Il..
Tlie Comagsp�;on acknowledged receipt of a letter ,from Segtor
•
The, ,.jCo 91{s on•s; acknowledged'Cirec'eip€ • of n "letIer`toh` M C
Chairman, -Richards ;-Braun from. P,dininistrator'r - Lawell.
Adininistra._ or-Lawell stated this letter was sent 'to _ aun
as .a 10.*4” 4 ” comment related to the draft 1 ative
EnvironmeritaL ocument to the MSP Long 'Term I Cambr gpsive
Plan. �,c,,He -explained that the MAC will ' publish a '•;;'nrma1
document1;responding to all comments. -He explairied that he
will attend:,_•the MSP Technical Committee meeting: on Decgmber
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 3
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a letter from Charles
and Kathrine Rothstein, 1807 Walsh Lane, regarding the draft
Alternative Draft Environmental Document.
DISCUSSION WITH MR WAGONER REGARDING
MENDOTA HEIGHTS/EAGAN CORRIDOR AND OTHER
AIRPORT RELATED MATTERS.
Mr. Wagoner submitted a copy of the current tower order which
affects Mendota Heights and Eagan. .He further submitted
information regarding the history of the Mendota Heights/Eagan
Corridor. He stated that this is a fairly adequate accounting
of the history of the corridor since 1968. {
Mr. Wagoner reviewed the tower order with the Commission. He
stated that simultaneous departures are occurring most of the
time. He explained that the magnetic compass headings of the
runways have changed over time. As a result, the MAC may
renumber the runways at MSP in the near future, thus
redesignating runways 11L and 11R (110 degrees) as runways 12L
and 12R (120 degrees) . The Commission noted that a fifteen
degree separation requirement for simultaneous departures
would then result in headings of 105 degrees for 12L and 120
degrees for 12R.
Mr. Wagoner updated the Commission on the status of the
revised corridor heading procedure being requested by the MAC.
During simultaneous departures, aircraft departing runway 11L
would be issued 100 degree headings while aircraft,ldeparting
11R would be instructed to stay on or north of the runway 29L
localizer. During non -simultaneous departures on runways 11L
and 11R, aircraft would be issued headings to cross them
within the corridor area, thereby avoiding most residential
areas. Mr. Wagoner noted that their procedures would alter
the current Ldn 65 noise contour and therefore would� equire
further environmental review i pr .or,r•�;.cb % ad p l€ f.oThis
ef3vironMeftal work is currently awaiting actiofiel hP,MAC.
Administ,r.t9r Lawell stated 09 5-degree=departurdak ngW off
•'-'runkay f1 ;axe {currently given. He inquired w'ha dictates the
!:a' �' .. iJ'j. .�. _�� ^r -fes rry
<` don$rolle 's ra issue this heading. Mr. WagonetTE.43pofided that
the' cgiviro1101§ are using that heading' as`• -a "c Sin`&ddrrt factor"
arra_;4;i:,:,0eing, used frequently, he wants "tobeniriformed-of it
_
iItint d ate0.; .,Current FAA rules require oniyica:`fif2een degree
hea'dng divergence on parallel departures, notes twienty degrees .
In' scme'situations, twenty degrees might be warranted;'but it
is " gene C011y not necessary.
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 4
A brief discussion ensued regarding controllers issuing
headings and how airplanes track those headings. It was noted
that older aircraft do not have the capability as they have
less advanced instrumentation.
In response to a question from Commissioner Surrisi, Mr.
Wagoner stated that the controllers are monitored by himself
and one other staff member.
Mr. Wagoner stated that a 90 degree heading is rarely given as
the controllers need to keep aircraft away from the St. Paul
Holman Field air space.
Chair Beaty inquired if the third parallel runway were to be
constructed, would it be used only for arrivals due to the St.
Paul Holman Field air space. Mr. Wagoner stated that aircraft
will be closer to the air space but that it could be used for
both arrivals and departures. Commissioner Surrisi inquired
if the MAC has asked the tower for their opinion regarding the
construction of a new runway. Mr. Wagoner responded that he
just reviews whether a new runway will work and how it will
work. Administrator Lawell stated that according to the
Capacity Enhancement Study, the FAA prefers a north/south
runway as opposed to the north parallel runway. Mr. Wagoner
responded that the FAA has been involved with this process.
He explained that the FAA's comments have been factored in
during the entire process.
In response to a question from Commissioner Surrisi, Mr.
Wagoner stated that there are rarely revisions made to tower
orders and that an EIS would need to be completed for any
revisions.
Commissioner Fitzer stated that according to Jeff Hamiel, with
a new radar system up and running, there is a good chance to
have-the•isaiie:due parallel departures which would narrow the
150d6gr'ee ''separati"ori. Mr. Wagoner stated this —Is a
possibility.
Mr. Wagoner stated that with the new Global Positioning
Satellite=Navigation system, there is a serious,.potential of
relieving -Mendota Heights/Eagan of noise. He further stated
thati2i ' is.'the FAA's goal to have the Global=,Positioning
System-in=place by the end of 1997. He furtherstated that
additional controllers are not needed for the new system.
Mr. Wagoner stated that the tower currently has simultaneous
departures about 10 times a day with 15 to 30 minutes breaks
between arrival and departure "pushes". Mr. Wagoner stated
that the traffic is growing at MSP by 3 percent a year.
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 5
In response to a question regarding what the circumstances
were leading to the issuance of the tower order signed by Mr.
Les Case in 1973, Mr. Wagoner explained that Mr. Case was the
Noise Abatement Officer in the regional office and that Mr.
Case was given the job as Tower Chief when Mr. Stan Ketchum,
Tower Chief, retired.
Commissioner Fitzer inquired if Mr. Case had the authority to
make pen and ink changes. Mr. Wagoner responded yes, that
tower managers had the authority to make changes. He
explained that new laws, NEPA, no longer allows pen and ink
changes.
In response to a question regarding the monthly aircraft
operations "tower log" data and the differences from the data
reported by the MAC, Mr. Wagoner stated that the ANOMS report
does not include military flights.
Chair Beaty inquired if nighttime traffic could be directed
over Minneapolis. Mr. Wagoner stated that the controllers are
instructed to use the corridor and that they will not send
head-to-head operations over Minneapolis. Chair Beaty stated
he wants to see the air noise distributed equitably.
It was noted that during day/night operations, according to
the ANOMS •report for October, Runways 11L and 11R were used
equally. Mr. Wagoner stated the report does not indicate that
the controllers are favoring any one particular runway.
In response to a question from Commission Fitzer, Mr. Wagoner
stated that the need for a new airport is a political issue
and that he does not have an opinion on this matter.
A brief discussion ensued regarding the standardization of the
Close In Departure Profile by airlines. Mr. Wagoner stated
the some airports are utilizing this; procedure. �� He ,stated
that this procedure should become moreLstandard roughout the
country.
Commissioner Stein inquired if the proposed north/south runway
will- be able to handle the increase in air .taffic. Mr.
j Wagoner r
responded that aircraft will be landing Itothe north
and:deparrting to the south. He stated that Minneapolis will
not' be' affected and that new pieces of Eagan :and :'Burnsville
wiIi3ber affected with air noise.
Mr. Wagoner informed the Commission that he would be happy to
return to another meeting. =
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 6
DISCUSS MSP COLLABORATIVE AIRPORT
PLANNING EFFORTS BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Administrator Lawell explained that Mr. Chauncey Case of the
Metropolitan Council recently informed the City that his
agency had recently completed a planning effort with
communities in southern Dakota County relative to the proposed
new airport location and he is interested in meeting with
cities around the existing MSP airport to see if a. similar
effort is worthwhile. Administrator Lawell explained that two
meetings. have taken place regarding this issue and that
another meeting is scheduled for January.
Chair Beaty stated he would be interested in hearing comments
from other cities regarding this issue. He further stated
that he is interested in comments from the Mendota Heights
Commission regarding whether or not the airport should stay or
be moved.
Chair Beaty suggested that the Commission should review the
City's stance on moving the airport and how it will affect the
community relating to air noise, community stability, tax
base, transportation and land use.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS/EAGAN CORRIDOR BRIEFING
GIVEN TO MAC AND MASAC ON DECEMBER 6, 1994
Administrator Lawell explained that Mr. John Foggia gave a
presentation regarding the development of a corridor and why
a corridor is necessary. Lawell explained that Mr. Patrick
O'Neill, Chairman of the MAC, has indicated that he does not
sympathize with Mendota Heights' air noise problem and he
believes the City allowed the uncontrolled development of
single family homes under the air traffic. Lawell noted that
it was explained to Mr. O'Neill that the City has adopted and
enforces an air noise attenuation ordinance, the only
community in the area to do so. In addition, the City has
actively worked to limit the number of housing units built in
the area overflown by aircraft, going to court to do so on two
separate occasions. Recognizing the nights of private
property owners to utilize their land, the City has been very
aggressive to ensure the construction of most air noise
compatible land use in the area. It was noted that Mr.
O'Neill is from St. Paul.
Airport Relations Commission
December 14, 1994
Page 7
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Airport Relations
Commission adjourned its meeting at 10:20 o'clock;P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
PART 150
BUYOUT
UPDATE
aaaaaaaaaa mammossallionem1111111111111
DECEMBER 1994
Seasons Greetings
from the staff of WDSCO
Holiday Hours:
WDSCO offices will be closed
12/26/94 and 1/2/95
ISSUE 13
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111iilliiIiiii111111111111iill
The preliminary title work will be
ordered for all properties within
Phase II during the first part of
January, 1995, Each homeowner
will be given the name of the
title company handling their
acquisition closing at their offer
meeting. A copy of the
preliminary, title commitment will
also be provided at the time of
the offer, which will allow time
to cure any title problems prior
to the scheduled acquisition
closing. Please remember that all
curative work (mortgages, leins,
taxes, etc.)lis the responsibility
of the homeowner, and can not be
paid by MAC.1
PHASE 11 - PROGRESS
INITIAL INTERVIEWS:
The homeowner notification and initial
interview process for Phase II began in
November and will continue through
January 1995 for those homeowners
approved for hardship status as well as
those in Priorities 7 through 10.
In Phase II, W.D. Schock Company, Inc.,
has slightly modified the team concept
approach for working with each homeowner
and tenant within the Part 150 Project.
Each homeowner will now be teamed with
only one Consultant and a Project
Manager who will oversee the assignment.
This will reduce the number of staff the
homeowner will coordinate with
throughout the acquisition and
relocation process. Each homeowner will
meet their team during the initial
interview. We want to encourage the
homeowner to contact their Consultant at
any time with questions and concerns.
The process starts with each homeowner.
being contacted by telephone or letter
to schedule a date and time to meet for
the interview. The assigned team chosen
to work with that homeowner will either
conduct the interview at the homeowner's
residence or at the Land Acquisition and
Relocation office. Your Consultant will
request that a simple walk through of
the homeowner's residence be done. This
walk through will help the Consultant
create a relocation plan which will
assist in their replacement housing
study designed for that homeowner's
relocation eligibility.
TITLE COMPANIES:
The Phase II Title Companies selected
are First Security Title and North Star
Title. Both of these companies provided
many of the title service requirements
for Phase I, and are very familiar with
the closing procedures for both
acquisition and relocation.
APPRAISAL & ENVIRONMENTAL FIRMS:
The MAC appraisal firm of Herman
Appraisal IServicehas been
selected for Phase II. Herman
Appraisal Service completed a
large number!of the appraisals for
Phase I, and the work was of the
very highestlquality. Ms. Herman
will inspect each of the
properties to be acquired, and
will be taking a video-tape
recording of, the interior of the
dwelling for, future reviews. An
associate from the same firm will
be inspecting the dwelling taking
exterior photographs as well as
exterior and interior measurements
of the dwelling and property. The
associate will be accompanied by
the selected !environmental firm of
Professionall Service Industries
(PSI). PSI completed all of the
environmental! inspections for
Phase I andilias .been chosen to
complete Phase II. The PSI
inspection will be performed on
both the interior and exterior of
the home. The inspector will have
a few simple questions on the
history of the home. No tests
will be performed during the
inspection. If the inspector
finds any suspect material, a
determination will be, made if
The Part 150 Buyout Update is a newsletter by the Metropolitan
Airports Commission and W.D. Schock Company, Inc', containing
information on the MSP Land Acquisition and Relocation Projects.
testing or corrective action is
required. The associate and PSI
inspector will take approximately forty-
five (45) minutes, Ms. Herman's
inspection will take approximately
twenty (20) minutes to complete; A
representative from Herman Appraisal
Services will contact each homeowner to
schedule an appointment for inspection.
Please remember all authorized
personnel will carry identification
badges and have identification on their
vehicle.
ACQUISITION & RELOCATION
CLOSING UPDATE
As of December 16, 1994, there have been
a total of 141 acquisition closings
conducted in Phase I. In addition to
the acquisition closings, a total of 121
homeowners have closed on their
relocation homes. Also, there have been
10 tenants within the NFT area who have
relocated to new residences.
Acquisition closings for those
homeowners in Phase II are anticipated
to begin late February 1995.
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
SNOW REMOVAL: •
The property management firm of Pham
Express will remove snow from vacated
properties throughout the winter months
on an as needed basis. Snow will be
partially removed from driveways and a
path will be cleared on either the front
or side walkway. With several vacant
properties located on each block, this
will give an appearance of someone still
living in the properties, as a means to
promote increased safety to homeowners
still residing in the neighborhood.
WDSCO would like to thank all homeowners
and tenants for not parking in these
vacant property driveways either before
or after they have been plowed. This
allows the property management team to
gain access to the properties when
necessary.
PUMPSTER:
The new winter availability hours for
the dumpster appear to be working well
W.D. SCHOCK COMPANY, INC.
/ 5844 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55417
(612)724-8898
(800)260-7062
for homeowners and tenants within
the NFT/RA area. WDSCO will
continue to monitor these new
hours and may adjust the times if
demand for the dumpster increases.
Please remember, the new dumpster
hours are Saturdays, from 9:00
a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
MAC and WDSCO request that each
homeowner/tenant, prior to the
scheduled final walk through, make
every attempt to clear the yard
and house of rubbish and debris.
The house needs to be empty except
for those appliances which the
homeowner has indicated they want
to leave in the house after it has
been vacated.
We do understand that many
unwanted items collect over the
years in a garage or basement,
This is why a dumpster is provided
in the area. "•If large quantities
of rubbish and/or debry are left
in the home or the yard, WDSCO may
request the items be removed, or
retain part or all of the
occupancy deposit to cover the
cost of the clean up by property
management.
Q.
BUYOUT FEEDBACK
I am thinking about
purchasing a townhouse when
I buy my next house. Can I
use my replacement housing
payment towards that
townhouse, or do I have to
pg1 buy a single-family house
like the one I live in now?
A. If you currently own a
single-family -.house, the
comparable house that your
relocation eligibility is
based on will also be a
single-family house.
However, you do not have to
purchase the comparable
house chosen for you. You
also do not have to purchase
another single-family house;
you may purchase a
townhouse, a condominium, or
any type of living quarters
you wish.
P �•
\ 4. .I ' is
I -
Tom Lawell
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Hghts, MN 55118
THE NOISE NEWSLETTER
DECEMBER 1994
PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY THE
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION TO INSURE A SOUND -CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT
Volume IV, No. 12
CHARTER MEMBERS OF AIRPORTS PANEL
MEET WITH NOISE BOARD
by Charles F. Price
Executive Director
Representatives of the Metropolitan Washington Airports
Authority and Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport,
the two charter members of a new advisory body of airport
proprietors formed by NOISE to facilitate constructive dia-
logue among communities and operators, met December 3
with the NOISE Board of Directors at its winter session in
Minneapolis, MN.
Neal H. Phillips, manager of the environmental staff for the
Washington Authority, and Sean P. Brosnan, noise officer
for Detroit Metro, both told the NOISE Board they believed
that collaborative approaches involving airports and com-
munities on selected issues of mutual concern would lead to
improved understanding on broader matters relating to local
economic development, in which both parties have a stake.
Phillips said he believed there was a "commonality of con-
cerns among airport operators and communities" and cited
work done by his office to encourage local jurisdictions
around Dulles International Airport to plan and zone compat-
ibly, which they have done. This occurred at the initiative of
the communities and the airport, he noted, "without support
from the FAA" and was "accomplished cooperatively". He
stated he looked forward to a similar cooperative effort with
NOISE on appropriate issues.
Brosnan likewise expressed faith in cooperative efforts and
advanced two concrete ideas for joint projects, one having to
do with determining exactly how funds are distributed by
FAA from the 12.5 percent noise setaside in the Airport
Improvement Program, and the other relating to the crafting
of a federal grant program for land -use compatibility plan-
ning that would not cause airports and communities to
compete for the same grant funds
The NOISE Airport Operators Committee was formed by the
NOISE Board last March. The' Washington and Detroit
authorities are the first two proprietors to join. A new
solicitation for additional airport members will be mounted
by the NOISE national office after the first of the year, and
it is expected that the two current members will assist in that
recruitment effort.
NOISE President Thomas Egan,. Mayor of Eagan, MN,
welcomed Phillips and Brosnan to the luncheon meeting and
encouraged their active participation in the future. The
meeting was held in conjunction with the National League of
Cities' 1994 Congress of Cities and Exposition at the Minne-
apolis Convention Center.
WASHINGTON, D.C. TO BE SCENE OF
1995 NOISE CONFERENCE
The next NOISE annual conference will be held July 26-29,
1995 at the Marriott Key Bridge Hotel in Rosslyn, VA.
Sponsoring the conference will be the Committee on Noise
Abatement at Dulles and National Airports (CONANDA),
an arm of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Govern-
ments, a regional planning and coordinating body. Also
participating as co -host will be the Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority, one of the two charter members of the
new NOISE Airport Operators Committee.
December 1994
Page two
FAA TURNS DOWN -
PHASEOUT WAIVER REQUESTS
Petitions by three small air cargo carriers for waivers from
the first interim compliance date under the Stage 3 transition
regulations have been denied by the Federal Aviation Ad-
ministration.
Requests to be relieved from meeting the end -of -the -year
deadline had been filed by Millon Air, Inc., AirTran Air-
ways, Inc. and AirTrain Corporation. Under the Airport
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) and its implement-
ing regulations, carriers must either reduce their numbers of
Stage 2 aircraft by 25 percent or achieve a fleet mix that is 55
percent Stage 3. The three petitioners had asked to be
excused from meeting the compliance date for various rea-
sons.
The petitions were rejected by FAA effective November 17.
A fourth waiver request - from Fine Air- is likely to be turned
down also. One other petition, by Antonov, a Ukranian
carrier, may be approved because of its special circum-
stances.
Millon Air had argued that it should be granted a waiver
because no retrofits are available for the Boeing 707's and
DC -8s it flies. In its ruling FAA said the nonexistence of
retrofit equipment cannot be accepted as a basis for a waiver.
To do so would oblige FAA "to grant a, waiver to every
operator of such equipment, ostensibly for the entire interim
compliance period."
Older airplanes with no ability to be upgraded "are precisely
the airplanes that must be eliminated from the fleet to meet
the goals established by Congress for a quieter overall
aircraft operating environment," said the agency.
"Further," the ruling went on, "by ordering a phased reduc-
tion, Congress sought to soften the economic blow of a
sudden operational prohibition. To protect these airplanes
until the final compliance date would not only negate the goal
of the Congressional mandate, but would eliminate the
expected interim noise benefits and unduly reward the ac-
tions of those operators of the oldest airplanes that chose not
to invest in the newer technology that their competitors
have." .•
..
AirTran Airways, a new entrant, had said in its petition that
the leases of the two Boeing 737-200s it operates do not
(Continue on page 4.)
NOISE BOARD.OKS
SURVEYING MEMBERSHIP
ON STRATEGY ISSUE
The Board of Directors of NOISE has authorized Executive
Director Charles F. Price to poll the membership on the
question of whether NOISE should undertake strategic
planning during the 1995 conference in Washington, D.C.
and if so, how the exercise should be structured.
The action came after the Board discussed the question at its
winter meeting December 3 in Minneapolis, MN (See
related story elsewhere in this issue). The idea of a strategic
planning session surfaced last March when former NOISE
Board member Karen Humphrey -of Fresno, CA offered to
lead an exercise in her current capacity as a consultant.
The Humphrey offer happened to coincide with the emer-
gence of afeeling by several Board members that the NOISE
organization needs to expand its focus from just airport
noise to a broader concern with other environmental prob-
Iems arising from airport operations. The Board explored
the Humphrey proposal at its summer meeting in College
Park, GA but ultimately the offer was rejected, in part
because of its potential cost and in part because some
members believed the exercise should be conducted inter-
nally.
Executive Director Price had made it known that the man-
agement firm which handles the affairs of NOISE has
expertise in the facilitation of strategic planning for organi-
zations, and that he himself has done such work. The
assumption now is that Price will provide the service if
NOISE decides it is needed.
Price was instructed to survey the membership and report
the results of the polling at the next meeting of the NOISE
Board March 3 in conjunction with the spring conference of
the National League of Cities in Washington. Assuming a
favorable vote, the planning session will likely be held on
July 26, 1995, the preconference day of the summer NOISE
meeting.
Below is the survey questionnaire developed in response to
the Board's direction. The form should be completed and
retumed by all members of NOISE, not just members of the
Board of Directors. It is very important that you fill out and
mail or fax this questionnaire to the national office, so that
we may know the will of the membership.
December 1994
Page three
NOISE MEMBERSHIP SURVEY
- December 1994
Please Answer All Questions Fully
1. Do you think it is necessary for NOISE to re-examine 10. If yes, in what ways?
its goals and activities by undertaking a strategic
planning exercise?
YES NO
2. If strategic planning is undertaken, would you take
part?
YES NO
3. Do you believe that NOISE should focus its efforts
exclusively on matters related to aircraft noise?
YES NO
4. If no, what other concerns do you think NOISE should
address? (Check one or more.)
a. Hazardous waste disposal
b. _ Air pollution
c. _ Water pollution
d. Mass transit links to airports
e. Land -use planning and zoning
f. _ High-density slot rule
g. Other (Specify below)
5. Who do you believe should be involved in strategic
planning? (Check one or more)
a. _ Board members only
b. _ All categories of NOISE members
6. Do you find that your membership in NOISE helps you
deal with your local noise problems more effectively?
YES NO
7. If yes, in what ways was NOISE helpful?
11. If no, how could the national lobbying effort be
improved? (Be specific.)
12. How could the NOISE Newsletter be improved?
13. How could our NOISE conferences be improved?
14. Do you make a special effort to attend NOISE
Board meetings?
YES NO
15. If no, why not?
16. Are you willing to be active in your region to help
recruit new municipal members of NOISE?
YES NO
Name
Title
8. If no, how could NOISE do a better job of helping? Address
Telephone rFax
9. Do you believe that NOISE's national lobbying
effort is effective and useful?
YES NO
December 1994
Page four
FAA TURNS DOWN
PHASEOUT WAIVER REQUESTS
(Continued from page 2.)
contain provisions to hushkit, but that AirTran intends to
incorporate hushkit provisions in the lease for two additional
airplanes it is seeking. However, no hushkit would be
available until spring 1995, AirTran argued. In its ruling
FAA said it is not obliged to "accept the business plans of
new entrants that call for operation of Stage 2 airplanes past
any compliance date, especially when the new entrant makes
those plans and begins service just a few months before a
compliance date."
FAA said further that AirTran had not shown how any
reasonable public interest would be served by granting its
waiver request. "The FAA considers full compliance with
the interim compliance requirements to be in the public
interest, and any waiver granted from an interim requirement
must reflect a net public benefit when weighed against
noncompliance with the rule.
New entrant AirTrain Corporation, the third petitioner, does
not currently own or operate any aircraft, but plans daily
passenger flights between Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and De-
troit and wants to import DC -9 30/40 series airplanes from
overseas. The nonaddition rule which NOISE was instru-
mental in adding to ANCA prevents importation of Stage 2
planes except for the purpose of modification to meet Stage
3 standards. FAA in its ruling pointed this out, and also
repeated that no prospective relief can be granted on the basis
of future business plans. Furthermore, the carrier owns no
planes and "it is FAA policy to consider for the possibility of
waiver only those airplanes in operation by an operator on the
date of the petition."
NOISE had opposed granting the requested waivers (See the
November 1994 NOISE Newsletter), along with the Air
Freight Association, American Airlines, and the National
Air Carrier Association.
NOISE
National Organization to Insure a Sound -controlled Environment
1225 Eye Street • NW • Suite 300 • Washington, DC 20005
Charles E. Mertensotto
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
January 9, 1994
TO: Airport Relations Commission Members
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administra
SUBJECT: Discuss Upcoming MASAC Executive Committee Meeting
Scheduled for January 12, 1994
DISCUSSION
The Executive Committee of the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abatement Council (MASAC) has called a meeting for January 12, 1995
to discuss the interaction of MASAC and the Metropolitan Airports
Commission on matters related to airport noise. More specifically,
the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the creation of a
"timeline and streamlined work plan" for MASAC to be coordinated
with MAC issues. A copy of the meeting notice is attached for your
information.
Councilmember Jill Smith, who serves as the City's MASAC
representative has asked me to attend the MASAC Executive Committee
meeting on her behalf. In preparation for the meeting, Airport
Relations Commission members are encouraged to reflect on the
subject of how well the MASAC and the MAC interact at present and
what steps could be taken to improve their collective ability to
address the airport noise problem. Should you have any specific
comments or suggestions you would like brought up on January 12th,
please bring your ideas to our upcoming meeting.
ACTION REQUIRED
Discuss issues related to the coordination of efforts between
MASAC and the MAC and provide staff with any comments or
suggestions you would like to have passed along at the upcoming
meeting.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC)
6040 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 • (612) 726-9411
Chairman: Scott Bunin
Past Chairs: Walter Rockenstein, II, 1982-1990
Jan Del Calzo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technical
Advisor: John Foggia
MEETING NOTICE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
JANUARY 12, 1995
9:00 a.m.
A meeting of the MASAC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE will be held at the
general office of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, BOARDROOM
AGENDA
At the December 6th MASAC meeting, Chairman
Bunin requested the Executive • Committee meet to
discuss John Nelson's recommendation to create a
timeline and streamlined work plan to be coordinated
with MAC issues. He felt it should be the Council's
objective to work as advisory to MAC on their
schedule and get MASAC information to MAC before
decision-making takes place by P&E and the
Commission.
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE CALL JEAN DEIGHTON (726-8141) WITH THE NAME OF YOUR DESIGNATED
ALTERNATE.
Distribution:
Scott Bunin John Foggia, Advisory
Bob Johnson
Jennifer Sayre Copies:
John Richter Mayor Mertensotto
Tom Lawell Jill Smith
Dick Keinz John Nelson
GI RECYCLED PAPER
e' .
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
January 9, 1994
TO: Airport Relations Commission •ers
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ
SUBJECT:
Discussion with MAC Commissioner Miller and MAC Staff
Regarding Mendota Heights/ Eagan Corridor and Other
Airport Related Matters
DISCUSSION
As you all know, in recent months the Commission has been
meeting with representatives of various airport related agencies.
In October, 1994 our guest was MAC Commissioner Louis Miller who,
during his visit, made note of a number of questions the Airport
Relations Commission (ARC) had and promised to return in the future
with answers to those questions. An excerpt from the October, 1994
ARC meeting minutes is attached to help refresh your memory of our
last discussion. Commissioner Miller, along with one or more MAC
staff members, have been invited to our January meeting to continue
our discussion.
ACTION REQUIRED
Meet with Commissioner Miller and MAC staff to further discuss
those issues raised at our October, 1994 meeting.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 12, 1994
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations
Commission was held on Wednesday, October 12, 1994, in the City
Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was
called to order at 8:00 o'clock P.M. The following members were
present: Beaty, Fitzer and Leuman. Commissioners Surrisi, Stein,
Olin and Olsen were excused. Also present were City Administrator
Tom Lawell and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. Also present were
guests Councilmember Jill Smith and MAC Commissioner Louis Miller.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the September 14, 1994 minutes was tabled until
November 9, 1994 due to lack of quorum.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS
REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the ANOMS Report for
August, 1994. ;Chair Beaty noted that Mendota Heights
registered 575 complaints. He stated that the complaints are
up fifteen percent from July. Administrator Lawell noted that
this may be the result of the recent mailings of letters and
magnets sent to all postal patrons in Mendota Heights. Chair
Beaty noted the increase in flights departing MSP.
Chair Beaty noted the increase in nighttime operations. MAC
Commissioner Miller responded that the MAC is trying to get
voluntary commitments from all operations to extend nighttime
operations from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. as opposed to 11:00
P.M.., to 6:00 A.M. He stated the MAC watches nighttime
activity carefully. He stated he will inquire why Mendota
Heights experiences high levels of nighttime activity.
to response to a question from Chair Beaty, MAC Commissioner
Miller stated that it has been recommended that only Stage III
aircraft fly during nighttime operations. He stated that
there are always delays (specifically related to weather) that
may cause Stage II aircraft to land during restricted hours.
Commissioner Fitzer stated that other airports in the country
have placed nighttime restrictions such as specific time
deadlines and aircraft type. MAC Commissioner Miller stated
that most of those airports have "feeder" airports which allow
them to take activity restricted from the main airport. He
stated the MAC has considered the Rochester airport as a
"feeder" airport to MSP. Chair Beaty stated that Mendota
Heights experiences a great deal of nighttime activity. He
suggested that departing aircraft use the south parallel
runway instead of the north. He stated this would help
alleviate the head to head operations Mendota Heights
experiences during non -peak hours. MAC Commissioner Miller
stated he would present this question to the Commission.
Chair Beaty stated the majority of Mendota Heights residents
complain about departing aircraft.
Chair Beaty stated that departing aircraft, during non -peak
nighttime operations, continue to use the 95 degree heading.
He stated that does not make sense. MAC Commissioner Miller
stated that the corridor has been examined for twenty years
and that they are still awaiting a response from ,the FAA to
their most recent request. Administrator Lawell stated that
Mr. Foggia has asked the FAA for a response and that the FAA
feels that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet needs to be
completed.
MAC Commissioner Miller stated that the MAC has tried to get
Northwest Airlines to commit to sound abatement procedures
(fly only Stage III aircraft). Administrator Lawell stated
that the City of Mendota Heights has asked that the MAC
contractually bind Northwest Airlines to be fully Stage III by
the year 2000.
Commissioner Fitzer briefly discussed ground tracking which
all aircraft have the capability to do through the use of
radials. He stated that the FAA has elected to not use this
procedure at MSP but that it is being done at other airports
in the country.
DISCUSS JOINT MAC/MASAC MEETING
HELD ON OCTOBER 4, 1994
MAC Commissioner Miller informed the Commission that the MAC
staff was not even aware of the Mendota Heights Airport
Relations Commission. He suggested that the Commission invite
the Department Directors of the MAC to future Commission
meetings. Miller suggested that the Commission invite Nigel
Finney. it
In response to a question from Administrator Lawell'Iregarding
MAC Commissioner distribution, MAC Commissioner Miller stated
that airport noise is not the only issue the MAC is'concerned
with. He stated the airport plays an important role to the
economics of the State. He stated the State Legislature is
concerned with the overall balance of airport related issues
and that is why members of the Commission are appointed from
all over the State. He stated the MAC has done a good job in
educating the community.
In response to a question from Administrator Lawell, MAC
Commissioner Miller stated that he is not aware that the Air
Noise Complaint Line is answered by a machine.
The Commission discussed how the volume of aircraft activity
has increased since the 1970's. It was pointed out that
Northwest Airlines has the oldest fleet in the country.
Councilmember Smith stated that the MAC has thought that the
aircraft noise has gotten better, but it has not. She stated
that Mendota Heights experiences repeated overflights. MAC
Commissioner Miller stated that there are no misconceptions
that•the volume of activity has gone up. In response to a
question from Mr. Miller, Administrator Lawell stated the
environmental documents regarding extension of Runway 4-22
have mixed messages. Chair Beaty stated it would be a good
idea to use the extension as a sound abatement runway.
Chair Beaty stated he does not understand why so few airplanes
take off over St. Paul. Mr. Miller stated that when Runway 4
is used for aircraft take an immediate right turn due to the
St. Paul airport.
The Commission discussed proposed runway improvements and how
it will affect Mendota Heights.
Administrator Lawell stated that a third parallel runway will
negatively impact Mendota Heights.
In response to a question from Councilmember Smith, Mr. Miller
stated that two factors were used to pick a site for a
possible new airport, removal of communities and wetland
involvement. He stated that the communities involved have
roughly 100 residents. He stated that a remote runway site
could be considered and that shuttles could be used.
Mr. Miller inquired what the City's position is on Dual Track
planning. Administrator Lawell stated that the City has
adopted a resolution in support of the dual track process and
that the Council has not taken a position favoring either
track. Mr. Miller stated that the final decision is not the
MAC's but the legislature's. Mr. Miller stated that Mr. Jeff
Hamiel has not taken a position but that he does believe that
expanding the current airport or constructing a new airport
will be necessary.
fir. Miller stated that the Joint MAC/MASAC meeting went well.
Chair Beaty inquired if there are plans to conduct another
joint meeting. Councilmember Smith stated that that had been
suggested and that it would be an excellent idea. She stated
the MAC needs to be aware of our concerns.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS
REPORTS AND CORRESPONDENCE
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Richfield Part 150
Buyout Update for September, 1994.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of Richfield and
Bloomington newspaper articles regarding Runway 4/22
litigation.
extension
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a copy of a letter sent
to Gubernatorial candidates, Arne Carlson and John Marty. The
Commission also acknowledged that carbon copies of these
letters were sent to the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the St.
Paul Pioneer Press newspapers. Chair Beaty suggested that if
the City receives any response, to please include in the
Friday News packets.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF RECENT MPCA
COMPLAINT REGARDING AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS
Administrator Lawell explained that the City recently received
a letter from Mr. John Morrill, MPCA, stating again that his
agency is unwilling to undertake an investigation regarding a
complaint received from a resident of Lexington Heights
Apartments, 2330 Lexington Avenue. He explained that a
complaint was received alleging that aircraft flying over the
area were emitting some type of fuel or chemical i'which was
damaging the exterior finish on vehicles parked outside.
Lawell explained that he spoke with Mr. Charlie Kennedy, MPCA,
and he indicated he was already aware of the complaint. He
stated that Mr. Kennedy informed him that the; MPCA has
received similar complaints in the past and recently conducted
an extensive air quality test in south Minneapolis. Results
of that test were reviewed by the Commission which showed no
such emission.
Administrator Lawell informed the Commission that he will
continue to research this incident.
DISCUSS MSP LONG TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
'ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
Administrator Lawell stated the MAC is currently in the
process of preparing an Alternative Document for the Long Term
Comprehensive Plan of MSP. He explained that this document
describes the future expansion options at MSP including the
possible future construction of additional runways and
terminal facilities.
Lawell explained that the MAC has formally released for public
review a draft copy of the LTCP AED. He explained' that this
document is approximately 200 pages in length. Hel explained
that the document's Executive Summary along with several
selected graphics have been submitted for the Commission to
review.
Lawell explained that the Summary describes alternatives 1,2,5
and 6. He explained that Alternatives 3 and 4 (plans
proposing a second south parallel runway) were dropped from
consideration.
As a point of information, the four remaining concepts are as
follows:
Alternative 1: Construction of a new 7,7000 foot north
parallel runway and an additional passenger terminal east of
the existing terminal.
Alternative 2: Construction of a new 7,7000 -feet north
parallel runway and a replacement terminal which would be
developed on the west side of the airport.
Alternative 5: Construction of a new 8,000 -foot north -south
runway to be located on the west side of the airport and an
additional passenger terminal east of the existing terminal.
Alternative 6: Construction of a new 8,000 -foot north -south
runway to be located on the west side of the airport and a
replacement terminal which would be developed on the west side
of the airport.
Administrator Lawell stated that the City is opposed to
Alternatives 1 and 2. Administrator Lawell stated that the
MAC is supportive of a new terminal and that they would like
to keep some parking on the east side.
Lawell reviewed the Summary of Differential Impacts as
discussed within the Executive Summary. He further stated
,`that a public hearing on this draft document has been
scheduled by the MAC for October 26, 1994 at 7:00 P.M. He
stated that the MAC is accepting public comments through
November 25. He stated that Commission members should attend
this hearing, if possible.
The Commission briefly reviewed the number of persons residing
in tl)e DNL 65 noise contour and the number of persons residing
in the 2005 DNL 60 noise contour.
Administrator Lawell noted that the 1992 DNL 65 contour shown
xn 'the document differs markedly from the same contour
previously distributed by the MAC. This discrepancy needs to
be investigated and explained.
The Commission compared projected number of arrivals in 2005
vs. current arrivals and departures. Councilmember Smith
stated that there is not much of increase in activity and
wondered if constructing a new runway would be warranted.
Administrator Lawell stated the City Council will be reviewing
the MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan Alternative Environmental
Document at their October 18 Council meeting.
Councilmember Smith stated the October 26 meeting is important
and that Councilmembers, Commission members and residents of
the community should consider attending. Administrator Lawell
directed Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser to call and inform
Commission members of the October 26 hearing.
UPDATE ON EXPANSION OF PART
150 SOUND INSULATION PROGRAM
Administrator Lawell informed the Commission that over the
past several years the City has participated in the Part 150
Sound Insulation Program as sponsored by the MAC and the FAA.
He explained that this program allows homes located within the
FAA described boundary of LDN 65 to receive extraordinary
insulation, window retrofits, etc. to achieve a predetermined
level of sound attenuation.
Lawell explained that recently the FAA adopted a newer 1996
Ldn 65 noise contour for MSP which expands the number of homes
within Mendota Heights which are eligible for participation in
the voluntary program.
Lawell explained that this matter was discussed at the October
4 Council meeting and the Council has formally expanded the
eligibility area within the City consistent with the new Ldn
65 contour.
Lawell explained that those members of the community who were
eligible to utilize this program have spoken very highly. He
stated the issue of adding schools to this program needs to be
,• addressed.
UPDATE ON NWA PEASE OUT OF
NOISY STATE II BOEING 727'S
Administrator Lawell explained that at the Commission's last
meeting, the Commission reviewed Northwest Airline's plans to
install engine hushkits on its DC -9 fleet. He.explained that
during the meeting, the question arose regarding Northwest's
plans for its 727 fleet.
3zawe11 briefly reviewed information submitted to the
Commission regarding selected pages from Northwest Airlines'
Class A Common Stock prospectus dated March 18, 11994. He
explained that the prospectus describes the overall fleet
composition of Northwest and indicates a total of1I58 Boeing
727-200 aircraft in the fleet. He stated that the average age
of these aircraft is shown as 16.2 years.
Lawell explained that at a recent September 27 MASAC meeting,
Mr. Mark Salmen, Northwest's Manager of Airport Operations,
indicated that the entire 727 fleet will be retired by the end
of 1999. Lawell stated that Mr. Salmen further indicated it
is the company's intent to retire the aircraft as rapidly as
possible according to the lease expiration dates of the
aircraft. Lawell stated Mr. Salmen explained he was not aware
of the actual lease termination dates but that he promised to
research the issue and will provide the information to the
City as soon as it is publicly available.
STATUS OF REPLY TO MAC DEPUTY DIRECTOR
ROBERT STASSEN'S RECENT LETTER TO TSE EDITOR
Administrator Lawell discussed Mr. Stassen's recent letter to
the editor responding to Chair Beaty's editorial published in
the West St. Paul/Mendota Heights Sun Current newspaper. The
Commission discussed inviting Mr. Stassen to an 'upcoming'
Commission meeting.
The Commission briefly discussed the FAA Tower Order dated May
30, 1973 which restricted the use of departure headings south
of 11R runway heading. Mr. Miller was given a copy of the FAA
Tower Order.
Councilmember Smith stated that the City of Mendota Heights
has a legitimate complaint and that we have a lot of ideas and
suggestions. She further stated that by living close to the
airport, the City will experience some air noise. Mr. Miller
responded that communication between the City and the MAC is
important and that every little idea and suggestion can go a
long way. Chair Beaty stated he would like to creative ideas
generated to help make the noise more equitable.
Mr. Miller informed the Commission that he would brief the MAC
regarding tonight's meeting and that he would send a written
response to some of the concerns, ideas and suggestions
presented.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Airport Relations
Commission adjourned its meeting at 10:30 o'clock P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
January 9, 1994
TO: Airport Relations Commission embers
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Adminis
SUBJECT: Discuss Upcoming Tour of Communities
Sponsored by the Metropolitan Council
DISCUSSION
Surrounding MSP
At our last meeting we briefly discussed land use planning
efforts being looked at by the Metropolitan Council for those
communities located close to MSP. The Met Council recently
undertook a similar effort in southern Dakota County relative to
the proposed new airport location, and desires to conduct a similar
study assuming that MSP stays in its present location for the
foreseeable future.
' I
The Met Council, MAC, and the cities of Minneapolis,
Richfield, Bloomington, Eagan and Mendota Heights! are all
participating in the discussion and on January 31, 1995 the group
intends to take a bus tour of the five communities to see the noise
impacted properties first-hand. The ARC is being asked to help
identify the neighborhoods and other land uses whichlshould be
included in the tour as it comes through Mendota Heights.
Attached for your information please find a memorandum from
the Met Council which further describes the upcoming Itour. In
addition, I have attached a map which should help you in deciding
which areas within Mendota Heights should be included in the tour
route.
ACTION REQUIRED
Review the attached material and identify the recommended
areas within Mendota Heights which should be included in the Met
Council tour route on January 31, 1995.
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 4, 1995
To: MSP Communities
From: Trudy Richter
Consultant to Metropolitan Council
Re: Meeting on January 31, 1995
The next meeting of the MSP Communities with the Metropolitan Council and MAC representatives is
scheduled for January 31, 1995 beginning at 12:00 Noon. The purpose of this meeting will be to visit
each community together on a bus and be provided with the opportunity of seeing first hand the various
ways neighborhoods are impacted by MSP and how each community has addressed the impacts and
concerns created by MSP.
We would like to start with Richfield, proceed to Minneapolis neighborhoods near the airport and then
cross the river to Eagan, followed by Mendota Heights and end in Bloomington. Estimated times of
arrival to your community will be provided to you the week of January 23, 1995, after we have received
tentative routes from each of you.
Please be prepared to board a bus at MAC, 6040 28th Ave. South, at noon. We will be providing box
lunches. Following our last stop in Bloomington, we will be back to the MAC for our cars at 4:30.
In preparation for sharing your community's experience, please consider a 35-40 minute route through
your community that will provide us with representative examples of the impacts of the airport on the
community as well as the development responses that have been made by the City.
Please provide to my office no later than January 23, 1995, a packet of information on your community
that we can include in a handout. It would be helpful if this information included a statement of the long-
range vision of the community and a list of impacts and concerns, preferably keyed to a map. We would
like 2-3 pages total from each community. It would also be very helpful if you would indicate the route
or order in which you would like to offer your community's information so that we can develop an
overall route and provide you with estimated times of arrival in your communities.
If you have any questions, please call me at 222-7227. Please send your information for the handouts
to Trudy Richter, Richardson, Richter & Associates, Inc., 235 E. 6th St. Suite 202, St: Paul, Mn.
55101. Thanks.
Reminder: Please let me know, the preferred route for neighborhoods and other development you
would like to show the other communities, no later than January 23. Thanks.
c, Nina
as Barb
Ever % eKno4s
Bachelor Av `}
be j
ct
Cir
v
8 •J
- `L'
Pr serve Path
Sibley NatuZViewCt
High Deer Run Td Shc
School arias
Q
Mendota Rd
MENDO
Marie Av
.r
N Freeway Rd
nica Ln
V•ictort
to
® Mendota Plaza` eL
A EIGHTS
Plaza Dr
eek Av
J
Victory Av
Furlong Av
Kendon Av
Lakeview
Av
F
c
d
CO
Quail ' dge
Huber Dr ii
c
eLn
Su
Bluebill Dr ea
.,S
Lake Dr
atersedg
Medallion
Dr
J
Mendota Heights Rd
SIM
y Marriot
E
d Dr
Qht
Holiday Inn
Sou hridge Av
ine Nne Rd o
ne Tri
0
Kenneth St
Beatrice St
McKee St_
Keefe St ^
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
January 9, 1994
TO: Airport Relations Commissi.n -tubers
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administra
SUBJECT: Discuss Status of Dual -Track Airport Planning Process
DISCUSSION
At our last meeting Chair Scott Beaty noted the status of the
Dual Track Airport Planning Process and inquired as to the City's
formal position on whether or not MSP International Airport should
be moved. As it was explained at the time, the City has previously
gone on record in favor of completing the Dual Track process and
has resisted efforts by various groups to jump to any conclusions
regarding the ultimate fate of MSP. It was decided that this item
would be scheduled for Commission discussion on our January 1995
agenda.
By way of background, I have attached a memorandum and several
letters related to this topic for your consideration. As the
documentation shows, the City Council has clearly supported the
Dual Track process since its beginning. While the ultimate
decision to move or expand MSP will be undoubtedly political, the
Dual Track process represents the only real opportunity to
systematically -and objectively look at the impacts of both options.
ACTION REQUIRED
Commission members should review the current position of the
City Council relative to the Dual Track process and should decide
whether or not it wishes to recommend to the Council a change in
the adopted position.
• CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administr
SUBJECT: Dual Track Airport Planning Legislation
March 16, 1993
DISCUSSION
At the request of Mayor Mertensotto, this item has been added
to the City Council's March 16th Council meeting agenda for
immediate Council consideration. Within the past week, legislation
has been introduced in both the House and Senate which would
immediately curtail the activities of the dual track airport
planning process. This process was set into motion in 1989 with
the adoption of the,Metropolitan Airport Planning Act to analyze
whether or not the current airport should remain in its present
location or be moved. The current process is intended to culminate
in a joint report and recommendation from the Metropolitan Airports
Commission and the Metropolitan Council to the Legislature in 1996.
Since 1989, the process has selected three potential new
airport sites in southern Dakota County and specific site screening
criteria are currently being applied to determine which of the
three sites should be deemed the best location for a new airport,
should it be needed sometime in the future. Considerable public
opposition to the selection of southern Dakota County as the new
airport search area has arisen. In response, Senator Pat Pariseau
(IR -Farmington) and Representative Connie Morrison (IR -Burnsville)
have introduced bills which would repeal the authority to conduct
the dual track airport planning process effective immediately.
The City of Mendota Heights has not previously gone on record
regarding the desirability of either option of the dual track
process. Rather, the Council has consistently maintained that the
dual track process should be allowed to run its course in order
that adequate information on both options be prepared in time for
the 1996 legislative deadline. Sound public policy decision making
requires that a fair and objective analysis of all available
options be completed prior to making a final determination on a
matter with such profound, long range consequences.
RECOMMENDATION
Mayor Mertensotto and I believe that the curtailment of the
dual track process at this point in time would be a serious mistake
as it would cut short the deliberative public policy process
without fully explaining the advantages and disadvantages of the
relocation option. As such, we recommend that the City Council go
on record opposing the recently introduced legislation which would
bring to a halt the dual track process.
ACTION REQUIRED
Should Council agree with our
be made to adopt Resolution No. 93
THE DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING
METROPOLITAN AIRPORT PLANNING ACT
MTL:kkb
recommendation, a motion should
-, A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF
PROCESS AS ESTABLISHED BY THE
OF 1989.
,3F CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
:jos; RESOLUTION NO. 93;:20
A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE DUAL TRACK
AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS AS ESTABLISHED BY
THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORT PLANNING ACT OF 1989
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of 1989 established a
dual track planning process to evaluate the long range comprehensive plan for the
Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport and the selection of a site for a relocated airport; and
WHEREAS, the evaluation continues under the joint guidance of the
Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission; and
WHEREAS, the expansion of the present airport facility and the
construction of a new airport are future, not present day, expenditures; and
WHEREAS, it is a common concern that our region's airport be capable
of competing in a world economy; and
WHEREAS, the planning decisions made today will either be beneficial
or detrimental to future generations; and
WHEREAS, for lack of adquate knowledge, the City of Mendota Heights
has expressly avoided taking an official position on whether to expand the existing
airport facility or to relocate; and
WHEREAS, the curtailment of the dual track process at the present time
would be a serious mistake given the importance of the airport facility to the economic
security of our region; and
WHEREAS, sound public policy mandates that a comprehensive and
objective analysis be made prior to any decision that clearly affects the health, safety,
and longterm economic well-being of our region.
oa
°gt:: o'
„ •
City of
.Mendota Heights
The Honorable Arne Carlson
Governor of Minnesota
130 Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Dear Governor Carlson:
March 18, 1993
It has come to our City's attention that the Legislature is
currently debating the future of the dual track airport planning
process as established by the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of
1989. More specifically, recently introduced legislation, SF472
sponsored by Senators Pariseau, Knutson and D. Benson, 'and HF479
sponsored by Representatives Morrison, Ozment, Tompkins, -Pugh and
' Osthoff would immediately repeal the authority necessary for the
Metropolitan Airports Commission and 'the Metropolitan Council to
continue the dual track process.
1
Our City is vitally interested in this issue and on March 16,
1993 the Mendota Heights City Council adopted the attached
Resolution in opposition to the introduced legislation and in
support of allowing the dual track process to continue.
Given the magnitude of this public policy issue, a decision to
foreclose the relocation option at this juncture would clearly be
a mistake. The future economic security of our region" demands 'that
a comprehensive and objective analysis of all available..Optiohs :be
completed prior to making a decision with such far reaching
implications.:
A recent Legislative Auditor's report identified ainumtkr of
areas in which the dual track study could be improved, and we
understand those suggestions are currently being addressed by the
Metropolitan Council. It is also important to notel that the
Auditor's report contained the recommendation that the dual track
study continue-wdlidi' as evidenced by the attached Resolution, our
City concurs. Your support.of this position is encouraged.as well.
Should you have questions or comments regarding this matter,
please feel free to contact me at your convenience. •
OF ME OTA HEIGHTS
MTL:kkb
Sincerely,
Tom La e
City Administrator
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 452.1850
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Mendota Heights,
Dakota County; Minnesota, as follows:
1. The dual track process established by the Metropolitan Airport Planning
Act of 1989 should continue to run its course culminating in a report and
recommendation to the Legislature in,1996, and
2. The City of Mendota Heights specifically opposes the recently introduced
legislation which would curtail -.the dual track process, and
3. The Mendota Heights City Council directs that a copy of this resolution
be forwarded to Governor Carlson, Senator Roger Moe, Senator Betty
Adkins (Chair of Metropolitan and Local Government Committee),
Senator James Metzen, Senator Deanna Wiener, Representative Iry
Anderson (Chair of Metropolitan and Local Government Committee),
Representative Tim Commers, Representative Thomas Pugh,
Representative Bob Milbert, the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan
Airports Commission, Dakota County Commissioners, and the governing
councils of northern Dakota County cities and cities adjoining the
Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport facility.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 16th day of March,
1993.
ATTEST:
.0,77%..4; — -�
Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By .rte+ - /44
� .•....t ^
Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor
2
:ASI.taif .7i
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airpor : ] ''t'
6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450
Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612)-726.5296—
March
612) ••7'26.5296' . -
March 22, 1993
Mr. Tom Lawell
City Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Dear Tom:
Thank you for your letter of March 18 expressing your support for continued work on the
Dual Track Airport Planning Process. By way of background, I recently met with Senate
Majority Leader Don Moe and House, Majority Leader Dee Long and other leadership
members soliciting their strong support of continuing the Dual Track Process. Both the
Metropolitan Council and the MAC have been working cooperatively toward this goal.
From a personal standpoint, I am totally committed to continuing the Dual TrIack Process
because it is the only opportunity that we will have to look toward twenty to thirty years
into the future. At some point in time, planning processes must continue and short-term
down cycles in the industry should not interrupt the long term planning process.
Office of Executive Director
3I ED erriA eIdSYO,: C:.
.sJoser<rzrM
.Cum._ ..
:,-oei'msD :Tor_•io,,
:Lc) :i em3L awf
b 7duilri.:I r2 as t-,
I will insure that the Commission is fully aware of Resolution No. 93-20 and will include
your comments as background information. It I can be. of any;help,:,orassistance, please
feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey W. Hamiel
Executive Director
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE • CRYSTAL a FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
ti J .
I',vr .
:713.a,t •
a• Ze.m•
n=„ .,. v •.
METROPOLITAN C NCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 F.a. FIJI. tdeet, Sr. Paul, MN 55101-1634 612 291-6359 FAX 612 291-6550 77Y 612 291-0904
') o C .1
.
v
R. b4 =re?,
a c� .s
y .i
to .
March 29, 1993
m V C ti N
0er
3'0.7
atkg LL
yr.
v.
rn
Cp c7 sic
•
Tom Lawell, City AdministtAtor.: r.
City of Mendota Heights `'
1101 Victoria Curve •;; :,
Mendota Heights, MN 55118:_. _ _.
Dear Mr. Lawell:
•
•
Your letter of March 18 and the attached resolution were much appreciated. During this time of
debate and deliberation regarding the location and/or possible epansion of Mmneapolis/St. Paul .
International Airport, it is imperative_ that all sides of the issue be heard in order to render a —
comprehensive, objective and well -thought-out conclusion. I agree that given the magnitude of this -- -
public policy issue, a decision to foreclose the relocation Option at_this time would be a mistake which ,.
would preclude exploring what we believe is a viable alternative:"
Thank you for taking the time to convey your comments on this very significant issue. Any additional
support that can be mustered from other communities around the region would go a long way. ; •-;•°
•
Sincerely,
Dottie Rietow
Chair
Recycled Paper
.� •:. �� .T • .T
• .41-2,1
Shoiild the dual -track airport planning process De cut ott'! :{
a
y
a
ll1L`1%1 l,lv JUL l U
•
YES: New airport studies are flawed
Public confidence In
the dual -track air-
port planning process
dled last month when the
legislative auditor's staff
delivered its .findings to
.the Legislative Audit
Commission.
Phrases like "bone-
head, undergraduate er-
rors" were used to de.
scribe the work of the
Metropolitan Council and
its aviation consultant. The auditors chronicled
-five years of exaggerations, flawed conclusions
and "questionable methods." Near afternoon's
end, new Metropolitan Council Chairwoman
Dottie Rietow admitted that the consultant will
be replaced, but smiled and said everything
else will be business a usual.
Business as usual Is no longer an option.
The auditor's report reveals gross exaggera-
tions of noise mitigation costs and problems,
current and future delay projections, economic
benefits.of a new runway or airport, and future
passenger travel at International Airport.
Not only was this information used to hood-
wink the Legislature into authorizing the dual -
track study, but now we have five years of
useless data paid for with $7.5 million of wast-
ed
asted tax dollars and airline user fees. Wasted
because it's Inconceivable, to imagine basing a
$6 billion decision for a new airport on conclu-
sions flimsier than a wet cardboard box.
The public expects and deserves better.
The Legislature cannot justify wasting an-
ether
nother $3 million on an unnecessary and.tt at
fordable .•relocated airport plan, especially
when no Informed citizen will believe that an
objective, informed recommendation can come
DENNIS
OZMI£NT
QUFST COLUMNIST
from this shambles.
What will happen if we abandon the duals
track process?
The Metropolitan Airports Commission 1s
fully equipped to administer our world class
airport well into the 21st century. Agency staff -2
members have held to conservative estimates
of aviation growth and airport adequacy. Let
them focus exclusively on international Alr- .0
port's future. The Legislature should supporttE
the airports commission, especially with e
gresslve noise mitigation measures that w� „
ease community disruption,•` Y.
Statutory authority for piotect(ng Inteejta•,. .
tional for possible future expansion currently,:
resides with the Metro Council although the
auditors determined the job isn't getting done.,,,
The airports commission dogsa't predict -cal:,
padty problems at.international until perha{ •�
the year 2010. Nonetheless, somebody should •
be workbag with surrounding communities on"
development controls. Many legislators: are:
ready to renovate metro. government: This is
an important function to Include In ,the, n '
and Improved version. _ _.
Northwest Airlines can be assured that we;
heard their plea to Congress: for relief fish'
unnecessary airport improvement taxes that
threaten to destroy the industry M the short
term.
The Legla]ature Is obligated to erase furtberr•
waste by passing H.F. 479 and Its Sedate coin,,
pardon, S.F. 472, to halt the deal -track pprocess.
Then we can sift through the ashes, determine.
accountability and protect everyone from fur-
ther misguided planning. c '
Ozmant, an ktdependent-Republican from Rosemoiatt,
represents an ores In Dakota County that Is being
atuded es a possibhs location, for i new elrpott.
•
e.
5 WHAT YOU
' , ;'CAN DOr
f• Yoke your
opinion by
contacting your
legislator or:
•
. • Rep. Iry
" •- 'Anderson.
`-Lcteal and
Metro MIAs
BS s� bite Off ce
Bldg.
Paul, MN •
` 55185
,•,-;96-4936
. i Suri. Betty
Adkins,
_7 -Metro and Local
- Government
Chahwom309 an
• St.Paul,
:296.4180
NO: Both. options must be explored
The Metropolitan
Council is a unique
organization. • Unlike 110-
cally elected officials '
who are charged with
looking at issues from a
parochial perspective,
the council must ask, "Is
this a concern for the
seven -county metropolis 007Th:
thn area?" and, more hn- Ri(TOW
portantl "How could
this enhance or hurt our COLUMNIST
re ion's long-term economic health and well
nen
So when questions arose in the late Has
about the longterm adeqruicy of the Interna-
tional Airport, the council — along with the
Metropolitan Airports Commission — was logi-
cally identified to examine them.
Analyzng the need for experided'afrpert ca-
pacity is a complex process involving. compli-
• cated Issues, such as the predicted health of
our • economy and the airline industry for lite
nekt two decades. That's blow long it takes,
once the decision to expand capacity is made,
to deal with the environmental, political and
economic complications inherent to a projeet
' of this magnitude. •
In 1989 the Legialaince approved a "dual -
•track " to look at both the possible
of the axis al and the posst-
bil tyof siting a new a
•
The process will lead to a joint report and
recommendation to the Legislature in j991.
The cost of this work - approximately $10
million —_,*represents less than 1. percent el the
' cost o! Milling new runway or airport, The
money is derived from a of each airline
•; ticket parchased in the atate.
Chi •o`ne back; the airports commission has
developed a long-range comprehensive plan de-
tailing possible improvements at international
Airport. On the other track, the council has
selected a "search area" or general location
for a possible new airport in Dakota County.,
This process is drawing attention from those
concerned with the negative Implications of an
airport in their cdlnmunity, as well as those
who want the airport to stay where it is today,
It has been suggested that the dual -track
process either should be stopped or changed tp
eliminate the second track (new airport) be.
cause of the problems currently facing the
airline Industry and some criticisms Identified
in a recent legislative auditor's report.
This report claimed that the council "prema-
turely signaled a need to add capacity before It
makes economic sense." While the report
raised some valld issues of concern — which
the council is addressing — It also acknowl-
edged that the "potential growth in regional
operations could make a new runway desirable
by 2000" and that the dual -track process should
continue without significant changes.•
A1iaridonlitg this process became of short
term trends or because exploring the opliotu
offends certain local lnterestd is not In tbt
Twin Crites' best long-term interest. We wan;
to ensure that our region has an adequetl
airport so we can compete In a world economy
A tot of jobs depend on that.
• e acknowledge that some mistakes we'n
made, but we ..leo strop�(y agree with th'
auditor's major conclusl�on-that the dna(-tract
• process should confiness acis•-1e e. It's prudent to contin
ne the right airport decision the right ttme.ke th
• nth*, char the Melzop!etan Council.
0y
0
C. •• Lt
rr. • < 0
tui, t) ; �n�w�► v
5. l•'' .\ /C1
:•: ' F.v Fs'''. 1 Cr
•
..ala N
v
r -
• `�• F-.,
.-„
••